AMD Radeon R7 M260 vs AMD Radeon R9 Nano

VS
Performance
Radeon R7 M260
1,8972% of 104,598
Radeon R9 Nano811% better
17,28217% of 104,598

The Radeon R9 Nano has 811% better performance than the Radeon R7 M260 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.

Performance per dollar
Radeon R7 M260
No data available
Radeon R9 Nano
26.6316% of 161.45

The Radeon R9 Nano has 16% of the performance per dollar compared to the leader for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark: AMD Radeon RX 7600.

Shop Radeon R7 M260
Shop Radeon R9 Nano
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Summary

#

About the AMD Radeon R7 M260 GPU

The AMD Radeon R7 M260 is an end-of-life mobile graphics card that released in Q2 2014. It is built on the GCN 3.0 GPU microarchitecture (codename Topaz) and is manufactured on a 28 nm process.

Memory

The R7 M260 has 2 GB of DDR3 memory, with a 900 MHz memory clock and a 64 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 14.4 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.

Cores and Clock Speeds

The R7 M260 includes 384 stream processors (SPs), the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 940 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 980 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 24 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 8 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.

Benchmark Performance

The R7 M260 has the 368th best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 1.81% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.

About the AMD Radeon R9 Nano GPU

The AMD Radeon R9 Nano is an end-of-life desktop graphics card that released in Q3 2015 with a MSRP of $649. It is built on the GCN 3.0 GPU microarchitecture (codename Fiji) and is manufactured on a 28 nm process.

Memory

The R9 Nano has 4 GB of HBM memory, with a 500 MHz memory clock and a 4,096 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 512 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.

Cores and Clock Speeds

The R9 Nano includes 4,096 stream processors (SPs), the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 1,000 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 256 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 64 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.

Compatibility & Power Consumption

The R9 Nano occupies 2 PCIe expansion slots. It supports HDMI 1.4a, DisplayPort 1.2 display connections. AMD recommends a power supply of at least 450 W to handle the GPU's thermal design power (TDP) of 175 W.

Benchmark Performance & Value

The R9 Nano has the 133rd best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 16.52% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090. Its 17,282 score and $649 launch price (MSRP) gives it a performance per dollar of 26.63. This is the 82nd best in value for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.

General Info

General overview of the GPU, including details like its manufacturer, release date, launch price, and current production status.

InfoRadeon R7 M260Radeon R9 Nano
ManufacturerAMDAMD
ArchitectureGCN 3.0GCN 3.0
Market SegmentMobileDesktop
Release DateQ2 2014Q3 2015
Launch Price (MSRP)--$649
Production StatusEnd-of-lifeEnd-of-life
ShopCheck PriceCheck Price

Gaming Performance

#

Select a game to compare FPS metrics

Display FPS for Rise of the Tomb Raider
Rise of the Tomb Raider
Display FPS for The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
The Witcher 3
Display FPS for BioShock Infinite
BioShock Infinite

FPS Benchmarks

This table showcases the average frame rate (FPS) achieved both GPUs in at various resolutions. Frame rate is a crucial indicator of how smoothly the GPU can run the game. A higher FPS generally translates to a smoother gameplay experience.

  • Frames Per Second
FPS data for Rise of the Tomb Raider
Rise of the Tomb Raider
Radeon R7 M260Radeon R9 Nano
Low - 768p
--
--
Medium - 768p
--
--
High - 1080p
--
--
Ultra - 1080p
--
56 FPS
QHD - 1440p
--
--
4K UHD
--
30 FPS
FPS Source: Notebookcheck

Compare Frames Per Second (FPS)

The average frame rate (FPS) in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, higher FPS results in a smoother gameplay experience.

Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon R7 M260 orRadeon R9 Nano

Compare Cost Per Frame

The average cost per frame in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. Generally, a lower cost per frame implies better value for your money.

Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon R7 M260 orRadeon R9 Nano
GPUCost Per Frame
Radeon R9 280X14.17-35%
GeForce GTX 980 Ti15.99-27%
Radeon R9 FURY16.94-22%
GeForce GTX 98019.68-10%
Radeon R9 290X20.18-7%
Radeon R9 Nano21.78
GeForce GTX 68029.01+33%

Benchmark Performance

#
Performance
Radeon R7 M260
1,8972% of 104,598
Radeon R9 Nano811% better
17,28217% of 104,598

The Radeon R9 Nano has 811% better performance than the Radeon R7 M260 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.

The Radeon R7 M260 is ranked 368th with a score of 1,897, and the Radeon R9 Nano is ranked 133rd with a score of 17,282.

Performance per dollar
Radeon R7 M260
No data available
Radeon R9 Nano
26.6316% of 161.45

The Radeon R9 Nano has 41% of the performance per dollar compared to the leader for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.

Radeon R9 Nano's 26.63 performance per dollar ranks it 0th among the other benchmarked GPUs in our database.

Relative Performance

The average score in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.

Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon R7 M260 or
GPUBenchmark Performance
Radeon R9 FURY17,543+825%
GeForce GTX 1060 (6 GB)17,401+817%
Radeon R9 Nano17,282+811%
Radeon R9 290X16,167.5+752%
GeForce GTX 97016,033+745%
Radeon HD 8770M1,934+2%
Radeon R7 M260X1,903+0%
Radeon R7 M2601,897
Radeon R7 M2651,882-1%
Radeon R7 M2701,857.5-2%

Relative Value For Money

The average performance per dollar in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. A higher score implies a better value for your money.

Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon R7 M260 orRadeon R9 Nano
GPUPerformance Per Dollar
GeForce GTX 980 Ti35.53+33%
GeForce GTX 98032.07+20%
Radeon R9 FURY31.95+20%
Radeon R9 290X29.45+11%
GeForce GTX 660 Ti28.14+6%
Radeon R9 Nano26.63
GeForce GTX 780 Ti22.34-16%
GeForce GTX 68020.47-23%
GeForce GTX 59013.11-51%

Benchmark Scores

This table showcases the average performance scores achieved by both GPUs across industry-standard benchmark tests. These scores provide a valuable insight into overall performance. Powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.

  • Popular
BenchmarkRadeon R7 M260Radeon R9 Nano
3DMark Time Spy Graphics
--
4,511
3DMark Time Spy Score
--
4,556
3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics
5,603
81,374
(+1,352.33%)
3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics
1,067
14,362
(+1,246.02%)
3DMark 11 Performance Score
1,942.5
14,793
(+661.54%)
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit
33.8
--
PassMark G3D Mark
498
--
PassMark G2D Mark
120
--
Unigine Heaven 3.0 DirectX 11
14.2
--
Unigine Heaven 3.0 OpenGL
11.3
--
Benchmarks Source: Notebookcheck

Technical Specs

#

Graphics Processor

General information about the graphics processing unit like their architecture, manufacturing process size, and transistor count. Newer GPU architectures generally bring efficiency improvements and may introduce technologies that enhance graphical capabilities.

SpecRadeon R7 M260Radeon R9 Nano
CodenameTopazFiji
ArchitectureGCN 3.0GCN 3.0
Process Size28 nm28 nm
Transistors1,550 million8,900 million

Memory Details

Memory specifications like their capacity, bandwidth, and clock speeds. GPU memory stores graphics data like frames, textures, and shadows which helps display rendered images. These specs are crucial for graphics-intense applications like gaming and 3D modeling.

SpecRadeon R7 M260Radeon R9 Nano
Memory Size2 GB4 GB
Memory TypeDDR3HBM
Memory Bandwidth14.4 Gb/s512 Gb/s
Memory Clock900 MHz500 MHz
Memory Interface64 bit4,096 bit
L1 Cache16 KB16 KB
L2 Cache128 KB2 MB

Board Compatibility

Compatibility information like their slot size, bus interface, power consumption, and display support. These specs are useful for verifying compatibility with your motherboard, power supply, and monitor.

SpecRadeon R7 M260Radeon R9 Nano
Slots--2 slots
Bus InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Thermal Design Power (TDP)--175 W
Suggested PSU--450 W
Power Connectors--1x 8-pin
OutputsDevice DependentHDMI 1.4a, DisplayPort 1.2

Cores & Clock Speeds

Processing power information like its cores and clock speed. These specs impact how fast they can process graphics. Each type of core or component serves a specific computational purpose.

SpecRadeon R7 M260Radeon R9 Nano
Stream Processors (SP)3844,096
Compute Units (CU)664
Texture Mapping Units (TMU)24256
Render Output Units (ROP)864
Core Clock Speed940 MHz1,000 MHz
Core Clock Speed (Boost)980 MHz--

Theoretical Performance

Theoretical performance numbers derived from the raw specifications of the different components like core count and clock speeds. While these provide a glimpse into peak processing power, they do not represent real-world performance.

SpecRadeon R7 M260Radeon R9 Nano
Pixel Fill Rate7.84 GPixel/s64 GPixel/s
Texture Fill Rate23.52 GTexel/s256 GTexel/s
FP32 Performance752.6 GFLOPS8.19 TFLOPS
FP64 Performance47.04 GFLOPS512 GFLOPS

API Support

Graphics API versions supported by these graphics cards. APIs evolve over time, introducing new features and functionalities. Older GPUs may not support recent versions.

SpecRadeon R7 M260Radeon R9 Nano
DirectX12 (12_0)12 (12_0)
OpenCL2.12.1
OpenGL4.64.6
Shader Model6.56.5

Check out these comparisons for similar GPUs:

Looking for alternatives? Check out these similar GPUs:

* Performance rating, performance per dollar, and rankings are based on the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark and MSRP.