AMD Radeon R7 M260 vs AMD Radeon RX 560 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 560 and the AMD Radeon R7 M260 occupy the same 26th percentile of all GPUs, yet they represent two completely different eras of mobile and desktop graphics. The data shows a decisive victory for the RX 560, which leads the R7 M260 by a 344.2% margin in the only shared benchmark, but the R7 M260 still holds relevance in specific low-power scenarios. Benchmark results indicate that the RX 560 is a discrete desktop-class solution built for sustained performance, while the R7 M260 is a legacy mobile part designed for basic acceleration. The average benchmark scores tell a similar story: the RX 560 averages 4569 points against the R7 M260’s 4499, a difference of just 1.5% when looking at their respective nearest rivals, but that aggregate figure masks the massive gap in raw compute capability.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 560 wins every head-to-head comparison available in the data. In the single shared test, Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 560 scores 16472 against the R7 M260’s 3708, a 344.2% advantage. That is not a marginal lead; it is a generational leap. The RX 560’s win extends across its entire benchmark suite, where it posts scores of 18941 in Geekbench Metal, 3671 in Passmark G3D, and 1437 in Passmark GPU Compute. These numbers place it firmly in the entry-level desktop segment, capable of handling modern game engines at 1080p with reduced settings.

The R7 M260 wins in exactly one category: efficiency of implementation. It has no TDP listed, no slot width, no power connector requirements, and no display outputs documented, which indicates it was designed as an integrated or low-power mobile component. Its only benchmark wins are qualitative — it supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the RX 560 supports Vulkan 1.3, but that is a feature list advantage, not a performance one. The R7 M260’s Geekbench Vulkan score of 5289 shows it can execute modern API workloads, but its OpenCL score of 3708 reveals the hardware limits. For users running legacy 2D applications or light media playback, the R7 M260 suffices; for anything compute-intensive, the RX 560 is the only rational choice.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast. The RX 560 uses the Polaris 21 chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 24.4M per mm². The R7 M260 uses the Topaz chip on GCN 3.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, with a density of just 12.4M per mm². The process node advantage alone explains much of the performance difference: the RX 560 fits nearly twice the transistors into a smaller area.

The compute resources differ by an even wider margin. The RX 560 has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs, compared to the R7 M260’s 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. That is a 2.67x advantage in shader count and a 2.67x advantage in texture units. The pixel throughput follows suit: the RX 560 delivers 20.40 GPixel/s and 81.60 GTexel/s, while the R7 M260 manages 7.840 GPixel/s and 23.52 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute rating is 2.611 TFLOPS for the RX 560 versus 752.6 GFLOPS for the R7 M260 — a 3.47x gap. Both support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the RX 560’s Vulkan 1.3 support is newer than the R7 M260’s Vulkan 1.2.170.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is a blowout. The RX 560 scores 16472, while the R7 M260 scores 3708, giving the RX 560 a 344.2% lead. To put that in perspective, the RX 560’s score is more than four times higher. This single result aligns with the architectural differences: the RX 560 has 1024 shading units versus 384, a 14 nm process versus 28 nm, and GDDR5 memory versus DDR3. The memory bandwidth disparity is particularly stark — 112.0 GB/s for the RX 560 versus 14.40 GB/s for the R7 M260 — which directly impacts compute workloads that stream data.

The RX 560 also shows strength in API-specific tests that the R7 M260 lacks. In Geekbench Metal, the RX 560 posts 18941, and in Passmark’s DirectX tests it scores 16 (DX10), 25 (DX11), 21 (DX12), and 57 (DX9). The R7 M260 has no corresponding scores in those tests, so the comparison is limited to OpenCL. However, the R7 M260’s Geekbench Vulkan score of 5289, while not directly comparable to the RX 560’s OpenCL result, demonstrates that it can handle modern graphics APIs at a basic level. The RX 560’s nearest rival in average score is the AMD Radeon R5 M230 at 4577 (a -0.2% delta), while the R7 M260’s nearest rival is the AMD FirePro W4190M at 4505 (a -0.1% delta) — both are essentially tied in aggregate, but the head-to-head reveals the true hierarchy.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The RX 560 has a 14 nm process node versus the R7 M260’s 28 nm. The RX 560 uses 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die; the R7 M260 uses 1,550 million on 125 mm². Transistor density is 24.4M/mm² for the RX 560 versus 12.4M/mm² for the R7 M260. The RX 560 clocks at 1175 MHz base and 1275 MHz boost, while the R7 M260 runs at 940 MHz base and 980 MHz boost. Memory configurations are completely different: the RX 560 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the R7 M260 has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth.

The compute units scale accordingly. The RX 560 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs; the R7 M260 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel rate is 20.40 GPixel/s versus 7.840 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 81.60 GTexel/s versus 23.52 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 2.611 TFLOPS versus 752.6 GFLOPS. The RX 560 has a TDP of 75 W, is dual-slot, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. The R7 M260 has no TDP, slot width, or power data listed. The RX 560 has display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a) and dimensions of 170 mm (6.7 inches); the R7 M260 has none listed. The RX 560 launched on 2017-04-17 with a launch MSRP of 99 USD; the R7 M260 launched on 2014-06-10 with no MSRP. The RX 560’s predecessor is Arctic Islands and successor is Vega; the R7 M260’s predecessor is Solar System and successor is Polaris Mobile.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560 scores 16472 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon R7 M260 scores 3708. That is a 344.2% lead for the RX 560.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, both the RX 560 and the R7 M260 support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6. However, the RX 560 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the R7 M260 supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RX 560 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. The R7 M260 has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RX 560 has an average benchmark score of 4569, while the R7 M260 averages 4499. The RX 560’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R5 M230 (4577, -0.2% delta), and the R7 M260’s nearest rival is the AMD FirePro W4190M (4505, -0.1% delta).

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RX 560 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The R7 M260 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs.

Q: What are the process node differences?

A: The RX 560 is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the R7 M260 uses a 28 nm process at TSMC. The RX 560 also has a higher transistor density at 24.4M/mm² versus 12.4M/mm².

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 560 is the superior GPU in every measurable way. Its 344.2% lead in Geekbench OpenCL over the R7 M260 is the headline result, but the underlying specifications confirm it is not a fluke. The RX 560 has 2.67x more shading units, 4.5x more memory bandwidth, and a 3.47x higher FP32 compute rating. Its 14 nm process node gives it a transistor density nearly double that of the R7 M260, and its 4 GB GDDR5 memory versus 2 GB DDR3 means it can handle larger textures and datasets. The RX 560’s launch MSRP of 99 USD positions it as an entry-level discrete card, but its performance relative to the R7 M260 is anything but entry-level.

The R7 M260 is not without a use case, but it is narrow. Its lack of TDP, power connector, and display output data suggests it was built for mobile or low-power systems where the RX 560’s 75 W TDP and dual-slot design would be impractical. For users with an existing R7 M260 laptop, the Vulkan 1.2.170 support means it can run some modern workloads, and its Geekbench Vulkan score of 5289 shows it is not completely obsolete. However, the R7 M260’s nearest rival is the AMD FirePro W4190M at 4505, and it sits only 1.5% below the RX 560 in average score — but that aggregate hides the fact that the RX 560 wins the only direct test by a factor of four.

For anyone choosing between these two, the verdict is clear. The RX 560 is the pick for gaming, compute, or any workload that demands raw performance. The R7 M260 is only viable if the system constraints — power, size, or thermal — make the RX 560 impossible to install. Benchmark results indicate that the RX 560’s 26th percentile ranking versus all GPUs is a floor, not a ceiling, for its performance class. The R7 M260’s identical 26th percentile underscores how weak the competitive field was at its launch, not to its own merits. The RX 560 wins on architecture, on specifications, and on every benchmark where both have data.