AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 vs AMD Radeon R7 M260 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison recorded in the database for these two GPUs is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In that single head-to-head measurement, the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 comes out ahead, scoring 3977 against the AMD Radeon R7 M260's 3708. That is a delta of -6.8% for the R7 M260, meaning the HD 6850 X2 holds a clear, though not overwhelming, lead in this compute-oriented workload.

The OpenCL result is interesting because it runs against the broader positioning of each card. The R7 M260 is the newer part, built on a smaller process and a more modern architecture, yet it trails by nearly seven percentage points in raw compute throughput. The HD 6850 X2, despite being older and built on TeraScale 2, delivers more shading units, more texture mapping units, and more raster operations hardware. The data suggests that raw resource counts still matter heavily in OpenCL workloads, even when the newer architecture has efficiency advantages.

The R7 M260's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 4499, which includes both its OpenCL result and a Vulkan score of 5289. The HD 6850 X2 has no recorded Vulkan score, only the OpenCL result, giving it an average of 3977. This is a notable split: the R7 M260's average is dragged up by its strong Vulkan showing, while the HD 6850 X2 has no equivalent data point. When comparing the two directly on the shared OpenCL test, the older card wins, but the R7 M260 demonstrates capability in a newer API that the HD 6850 X2 cannot even access.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database puts these numbers in context. The R7 M260 sits at the 26th percentile of all GPUs, with its closest competitors being the AMD FirePro W4190M (avg score 4505, delta -0.1%), the Intel HD Graphics P530 (avg score 4560, delta -1.3%), the AMD Radeon RX 560 (avg score 4569, delta -1.5%), and the AMD Radeon R5 M230 (avg score 4577, delta -1.7%). The R7 M260 is within 1.7% of all four of these rivals, meaning it occupies a tightly clustered performance tier. The HD 6850 X2, meanwhile, sits at the 24th percentile, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 (avg score 3964, delta 0.3%), the NVIDIA GeForce 830M (avg score 3957, delta 0.5%), the AMD Radeon R5 M420 (avg score 3956, delta 0.5%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (avg score 3953, delta 0.6%). The HD 6850 X2 leads all of these by less than one percentage point, placing it at the top of a very narrow performance band.

What the data implies is that these two GPUs are not far apart in absolute terms, but they achieve their scores through very different means. The HD 6850 X2 wins the shared test by brute force: more hardware, wider memory bus, higher bandwidth. The R7 M260 counters with a newer architecture and a Vulkan-capable driver stack, which shows up in its higher average score. The head-to-head result, however, is unambiguous: on the one test where both have data, the HD 6850 X2 is faster.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only direct benchmark comparison in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 3977, against 3708 for the AMD Radeon R7 M260, a delta of -6.8% for the R7 M260.

Q: Does the R7 M260 have any benchmark advantage over the HD 6850 X2?

A: Yes. The R7 M260 has a recorded Geekbench Vulkan score of 5289, while the HD 6850 X2 has no Vulkan score at all. This Vulkan result raises the R7 M260's average benchmark score to 4499, compared to 3977 for the HD 6850 X2.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The R7 M260 is within 1.7% of its four nearest rivals, which include the AMD FirePro W4190M, Intel HD Graphics P530, AMD Radeon RX 560, and AMD Radeon R5 M230. The HD 6850 X2 leads its nearest rivals, including the NVIDIA Quadro K2000, NVIDIA GeForce 830M, AMD Radeon R5 M420, and NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M, by less than one percentage point.

Q: What percentile rank does each GPU hold in the database?

A: The R7 M260 sits at the 26th percentile of all GPUs, while the HD 6850 X2 sits at the 24th percentile.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The HD 6850 X2 has 960 shading units, while the R7 M260 has 384 shading units. The HD 6850 X2 also has 48 texture mapping units and 32 raster operations units, compared to 24 TMUs and 8 ROPs for the R7 M260.

Q: Is there a difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: Yes, and it is substantial. The HD 6850 X2 has a 256-bit memory bus with GDDR5 memory and 134.4 GB/s of bandwidth, while the R7 M260 has a 64-bit bus with DDR3 memory and 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear split decision. If the workload is OpenCL compute, the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 is the faster part, winning the only shared benchmark by 6.8%. Its advantage comes from a much larger hardware configuration: 960 shading units versus 384, 48 TMUs versus 24, 32 ROPs versus 8, and a 256-bit memory bus delivering 134.4 GB/s against the R7 M260's 64-bit bus at 14.40 GB/s. For anyone running OpenCL-bound tasks, the HD 6850 X2 is the better choice according to the measurements.

However, the R7 M260 is not without its own claim. Its average benchmark score of 4499 exceeds the HD 6850 X2's 3977, driven entirely by a Vulkan score of 5289 that the older card cannot produce. The HD 6850 X2 has no Vulkan support in the database, capping its API reach at DirectX 11.2 and OpenGL 4.4. The R7 M260 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. For anyone targeting modern APIs or running Vulkan workloads, the R7 M260 is the only viable option between the two.

The percentile rankings reinforce this split. The R7 M260 at the 26th percentile and the HD 6850 X2 at the 24th percentile are separated by just two percentile points, indicating that neither card is dramatically above the other in the overall GPU landscape. The R7 M260's nearest rivals all cluster within 1.7%, and the HD 6850 X2's nearest rivals all sit within 0.6%. Both cards are firmly in the lower-middle tier of the database.

Who should pick which? The data says: pick the HD 6850 X2 if the task is purely OpenCL compute and the system can accommodate its power requirements, which the database lists as a 254 W TDP with two 8-pin connectors and a suggested 600 W PSU. Pick the R7 M260 if the workload involves Vulkan or newer DirectX APIs, or if the lower power footprint and smaller die matter more than raw compute throughput. The R7 M260's TDP is not listed in the database, but its 28 nm process and mobile-oriented design imply a lighter power draw than the HD 6850 X2's 254 W figure.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge sharply on nearly every specification field. The R7 M260 is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 125 mm² and 1,550 million transistors. The HD 6850 X2 uses a 40 nm process, also at TSMC, with a die size of 255 mm² and 1,700 million transistors. The transistor density tells the story: 12.4 million transistors per mm² for the R7 M260 versus 6.7 million per mm² for the HD 6850 X2. The newer process allows the R7 M260 to pack nearly twice as many transistors per area, even though the HD 6850 X2 has more total transistors.

Clock speeds differ as well. The R7 M260 has a base clock of 940 MHz and a boost clock of 980 MHz. The HD 6850 X2 has no base or boost clock listed in the database. Memory clocks also differ: the R7 M260 runs its DDR3 memory at 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective data rate, while the HD 6850 X2 runs its GDDR5 memory at 1050 MHz with 4.2 Gbps effective. The memory bus width is the biggest gap: 64-bit for the R7 M260 versus 256-bit for the HD 6850 X2, resulting in bandwidth of 14.40 GB/s versus 134.4 GB/s.

Compute rates follow the hardware counts. The R7 M260 delivers 7.840 GPixel/s pixel rate and 23.52 GTexel/s texture rate, with FP32 performance of 752.6 GFLOPS and FP16 performance of 752.6 GFLOPS (1:1). The HD 6850 X2 delivers 25.60 GPixel/s and 38.40 GTexel/s, with FP32 of 1.536 TFLOPS and no FP16 figure recorded. The HD 6850 X2 is roughly twice as fast in pixel rate, 1.6 times faster in texture rate, and just over twice as fast in FP32.

Power and physical specs also differ. The HD 6850 X2 has a TDP of 254 W, is dual-slot, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and lists a suggested PSU of 600 W. The R7 M260 has none of these fields populated in the database. The bus interface differs: PCIe 3.0 x8 for the R7 M260 versus PCIe 2.0 x16 for the HD 6850 X2. Display outputs are listed only for the HD 6850 X2: 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.1.

Architecture Differences

The R7 M260 is built on GCN 3.0 architecture with the Topaz chip, part of the Gem System generation under the R7 M200 family. The HD 6850 X2 uses TeraScale 2 architecture with the Barts chip, part of the Northern Islands generation under the HD 6800 family. These are fundamentally different GPU designs from different eras, and the data reflects that.

The compute resources are starkly different. The R7 M260 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The HD 6850 X2 has 960 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. That is 2.5 times more shading units, twice the TMUs, and four times the ROPs for the older card. This explains why the HD 6850 X2 wins the OpenCL benchmark despite its older architecture: it simply has more hardware to throw at the workload.

API support is where the R7 M260 pulls ahead. The R7 M260 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The HD 6850 X2 supports DirectX 11.2 (11_0), OpenGL 4.4, and has no Vulkan support listed. The R7 M260 also has FP16 support at 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the HD 6850 X2 has no FP16 data recorded. The R7 M260's GCN 3.0 architecture brings modern API features and compute capabilities that TeraScale 2 cannot match.

Memory architecture also differs fundamentally. The R7 M260 uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus. The HD 6850 X2 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. Both have the same memory capacity, but the HD 6850 X2 has 9.3 times the bandwidth. This is a massive difference that shows up in any memory-bound workload. The R7 M260's smaller bus and slower memory type are the clearest architectural weaknesses in the data.

The production status for both is end-of-life. Release dates differ: the R7 M260 launched June 10, 2014, while the HD 6850 X2 launched September 18, 2011. The R7 M260's predecessor is listed as Solar System and its successor as Polaris Mobile. The HD 6850 X2's predecessor is Evergreen and its successor is Southern Islands.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 wins in raw compute throughput. The OpenCL benchmark shows it ahead by 6.8%, and its hardware specifications support that result. With 960 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 134.4 GB/s of bandwidth, it is designed to push large amounts of data through parallel workloads. The pixel rate of 25.60 GPixel/s and texture rate of 38.40 GTexel/s are both significantly higher than the R7 M260's 7.840 GPixel/s and 23.52 GTexel/s. FP32 performance of 1.536 TFLOPS is more than double the R7 M260's 752.6 GFLOPS. For OpenCL compute, legacy DirectX workloads, or any task that stresses memory bandwidth, the HD 6850 X2 is the clear winner according to the recorded data.

The AMD Radeon R7 M260 wins in modern API support and overall average score. Its Vulkan score of 5289 is the highest recorded benchmark for either card, and it lifts the average to 4499, which is 13.1% higher than the HD 6850 X2's 3977 average. The R7 M260 supports DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the HD 6850 X2 is capped at DirectX 11.2 and OpenGL 4.4 with no Vulkan. The R7 M260 also has FP16 support at 1:1 with FP32, a feature absent from the HD 6850 X2's data. For any workload that uses Vulkan, DirectX 12, or half-precision compute, the R7 M260 is the only choice between the two.

The R7 M260 also wins on efficiency and modern manufacturing. Its 28 nm process with 12.4 million transistors per mm² shows a much denser design than the HD 6850 X2's 40 nm process with 6.7 million per mm². The R7 M260 has no TDP listed, but the HD 6850 X2's 254 W TDP, dual-slot cooler, and two 8-pin power connectors indicate a power-hungry design. The R7 M260's PCIe 3.0 x8 interface is newer than the HD 6850 X2's PCIe 2.0 x16, though the older card's wider interface may compensate in some scenarios.

The percentile data places both cards in similar tiers: 26th for the R7 M260, 24th for the HD 6850 X2. Neither is a standout performer in the broader GPU landscape. The HD 6850 X2 leads its nearest rivals by less than one percent, while the R7 M260 trails its nearest rivals by between 0.1% and 1.7%. The R7 M260 sits just below a cluster of slightly faster cards, while the HD 6850 X2 sits just above a cluster of slightly slower ones. In practical terms, the database shows two GPUs that are close in overall standing but opposite in their strengths: one built for legacy compute power, one built for modern API reach.