AMD Radeon R7 M260 vs AMD Radeon Vega 3 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 M260 and AMD Radeon Vega 3 represent two distinct approaches to mobile graphics, separated by five years of architectural evolution. The R7 M260 is a discrete part from 2014, while the Vega 3 is a 2019 integrated processor. Benchmark results show a split decision: the R7 M260 wins the Vulkan test by a wide margin, while the Vega 3 takes the OpenCL test by a smaller amount. Their average benchmark scores are close, with the R7 M260 at 4499 and the Vega 3 at 4268, placing them at the 26th and 25th percentiles of all GPUs, respectively.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two available head-to-head tests reveal contrasting strengths. In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the AMD Radeon R7 M260 scores 5289, while the AMD Radeon Vega 3 scores 3961. This gives the R7 M260 a decisive 33.5% advantage. This is a substantial lead, indicating that the older discrete GPU handles Vulkan workloads with significantly greater efficiency. The R7 M260’s score here is also its strongest benchmark result, suggesting its architecture is particularly well-suited to this modern API.

Conversely, in the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Vega 3 pulls ahead. It scores 3963 against the R7 M260’s 3708, a 6.4% margin of victory. While this win is smaller than the R7 M260’s Vulkan victory, it is still a clear result. The Vega 3’s OpenCL score is close to its Vulkan score (3963 vs 3961), showing consistent performance across these two APIs. In contrast, the R7 M260 shows a huge disparity between its Vulkan score (5289) and its OpenCL score (3708), suggesting its OpenCL drivers or hardware implementation are less optimized.

Looking at the broader context, the R7 M260’s average benchmark score of 4499 places it just 0.1% behind the AMD FirePro W4190M (4505) and 1.3% behind the Intel HD Graphics P530 (4560). It also sits 1.5% behind the AMD Radeon RX 560 (4569) and 1.7% behind the AMD Radeon R5 M230 (4577). The Vega 3, with an average of 4268, is 0.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M (4282), 0.6% behind the AMD FirePro W2100 (4295), and 1.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 (4335). Interestingly, the Vega 3 is 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M (4241). These rival deltas are all within a narrow band, confirming that both GPUs occupy a similar performance tier in the overall database.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental difference lies in the design philosophy. The AMD Radeon R7 M260 is a discrete GPU built on the GCN 3.0 architecture, using the Topaz chip. It is manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 125 mm² and 1,550 million transistors. The AMD Radeon Vega 3 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) based on GCN 5.0, using the Picasso chip. It is built on a more advanced 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with a larger die of 210 mm² and a much higher transistor count of 4,940 million. The transistor density reflects this: 12.4M per mm² for the R7 M260 versus 23.5M per mm² for the Vega 3.

The compute configurations are also starkly different. The R7 M260 has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 raster operations pipelines (ROPs). The Vega 3 has exactly half of each: 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. This explains the raw throughput figures. The R7 M260 delivers a pixel rate of 7.840 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 23.52 GTexel/s, while the Vega 3 manages 4.400 GPixel/s and 13.20 GTexel/s. For floating-point performance, the R7 M260 achieves 752.6 GFLOPS in FP32, while the Vega 3 achieves 422.4 GFLOPS. However, the Vega 3 excels in FP16, reaching 844.8 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, whereas the R7 M260 is limited to 752.6 GFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio.

Memory configurations are a major point of divergence. The R7 M260 is equipped with 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 3 uses System Shared memory, with its type, bus width, and bandwidth all marked as "System Shared" or "System Dependent." This means the Vega 3’s performance is tied to the system’s RAM, which can be a bottleneck. Clock speeds also differ significantly: the R7 M260 has a base clock of 940 MHz and a boost of 980 MHz, while the Vega 3 has a much lower base of 300 MHz but a higher boost of 1100 MHz.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 M260 is the clear winner in Vulkan-based workloads. Its 33.5% lead in the Geekbench Vulkan test is the single largest performance gap in this comparison. This makes it the better choice for applications or games that leverage the Vulkan API, where its dedicated memory and higher raw compute throughput (752.6 GFLOPS FP32) appear to provide a significant advantage. Its higher pixel and texture rates also suggest it can handle fill-rate-bound tasks more effectively.

The AMD Radeon Vega 3 wins in OpenCL, with a 6.4% margin in the Geekbench OpenCL test. This is notable because it wins despite having half the shading units, TMUs, and ROPs of the R7 M260. Its higher boost clock (1100 MHz vs 980 MHz) and the architectural efficiency of GCN 5.0 likely contribute to this result. Additionally, the Vega 3 supports FP16 at double the rate of the R7 M260 (844.8 GFLOPS vs 752.6 GFLOPS), which could be beneficial for compute tasks that utilize half-precision math.

In terms of API support, the Vega 3 is more forward-looking. It supports DirectX 12_1, while the R7 M260 supports DirectX 12_0. The Vega 3 also supports Vulkan 1.3, whereas the R7 M260 is limited to Vulkan 1.2.170. This makes the Vega 3 more compatible with newer software that requires the latest API features. The Vega 3 also has a defined TDP of 15 W and uses no power connectors, making it a low-power integrated solution, while the R7 M260’s TDP is not listed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260 has a higher average benchmark score of 4499, compared to the AMD Radeon Vega 3’s 4268. This places the R7 M260 at the 26th percentile and the Vega 3 at the 25th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in the Geekbench Vulkan test?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260 scores 5289, which is 33.5% higher than the AMD Radeon Vega 3’s score of 3961. The R7 M260 is the winner in this test.

Q: What is the result of the Geekbench OpenCL test between them?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 3 wins the OpenCL test with a score of 3963, while the AMD Radeon R7 M260 scores 3708. The Vega 3’s margin of victory is 6.4%.

Q: What are the differences in their shading unit counts?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260 has 384 shading units, which is double the 192 shading units found in the AMD Radeon Vega 3. The R7 M260 also has double the TMUs (24 vs 12) and ROPs (8 vs 4).

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 3 has a higher boost clock of 1100 MHz, while the AMD Radeon R7 M260 has a boost clock of 980 MHz. The R7 M260 has a higher base clock of 940 MHz compared to the Vega 3’s 300 MHz.

Q: What memory types do the two GPUs use?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260 uses 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory with a 64-bit bus and 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon Vega 3 uses System Shared memory, with its bandwidth listed as System Dependent.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear split based on workload. For users prioritizing Vulkan performance, the AMD Radeon R7 M260 is the definitive choice. Its 33.5% lead in the Geekbench Vulkan test is overwhelming and is backed by its higher FP32 compute (752.6 GFLOPS) and dedicated memory. This makes it better suited for gaming or applications that rely heavily on the Vulkan API.

For users focused on OpenCL compute or those who require the latest API features, the AMD Radeon Vega 3 is the better option. It wins the OpenCL test by 6.4% and supports DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.3, compared to the R7 M260’s DirectX 12_0 and Vulkan 1.2.170. Its doubled FP16 throughput (844.8 GFLOPS) is also a point in its favor for specific compute tasks. The Vega 3’s lower power envelope (15 W) and integrated nature also make it a more suitable choice for thin-and-light systems, despite its lower overall average score.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R7 M260 | AMD Radeon Vega 3 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 5.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 1,550 million | 4,940 million |

| Die Size | 125 mm² | 210 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.4M / mm² | 23.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 940 MHz | 300 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 980 MHz | 1100 MHz |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 14.40 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 384 | 192 |

| TMUs | 24 | 12 |

| ROPs | 8 | 4 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.840 GPixel/s | 4.400 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 23.52 GTexel/s | 13.20 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 752.6 GFLOPS | 422.4 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 752.6 GFLOPS (1:1) | 844.8 GFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | Not listed | 15 W |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | IGP |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.3 |