AMD Radeon R7 M260 vs NVIDIA GeForce 940MX Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce 940MX and AMD Radeon R7 M260 are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from different architectural generations, yet they present a surprisingly balanced competitive picture. The data shows a clear split: the GeForce 940MX dominates in OpenCL compute workloads, while the Radeon R7 M260 counters with a decisive win in Vulkan graphics tests. This makes the choice between them highly dependent on the specific applications and APIs a user prioritizes.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 940MX has a higher average benchmark score of 4844 compared to the AMD Radeon R7 M260’s 4499. This places the 940MX in the 28th percentile of all GPUs, while the R7 M260 sits slightly lower in the 26th percentile.

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

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 940MX is significantly ahead in OpenCL, scoring 4939 against the AMD Radeon R7 M260’s 3708. This represents a 33.2% advantage for the 940MX in this specific compute benchmark.

Q: What happens in the Vulkan benchmark?

A: The tables turn in the Vulkan test. The AMD Radeon R7 M260 scores 5289, which is 10.2% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX’s score of 4749. This shows a clear advantage for the AMD part in this graphics API.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for the GeForce 940MX based on average score?

A: The closest competitors to the GeForce 940MX (avg score 4844) include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M (avg score 4855, -0.2% delta), the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX (avg score 4867, -0.5% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (avg score 4893, -1% delta). Interestingly, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB is also listed as a rival with a 1.1% delta.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 940MX has a slightly higher transistor density of 12.6M transistors per mm², compared to the AMD Radeon R7 M260’s 12.4M per mm². Despite this, the AMD chip has a smaller die size.

Q: What is the difference in their DirectX API support?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX supports DirectX 12 (11_0). This indicates the AMD part has a higher feature level for DirectX 12.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures from their respective manufacturers. The NVIDIA GeForce 940MX is based on the GM107 chip using the Maxwell architecture, part of the GeForce 900M generation. In contrast, the AMD Radeon R7 M260 utilizes the Topaz chip with the GCN 3.0 architecture, belonging to the "Gem System" (R7 M200) generation. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the raw chip characteristics differ.

The NVIDIA chip is larger and more complex. It packs 1,870 million transistors onto a 148 mm² die, whereas the AMD chip contains 1,550 million transistors on a smaller 125 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 12.6M per mm² for NVIDIA and 12.4M per mm² for AMD, showing the NVIDIA chip packs slightly more transistors per area. A key architectural difference lies in the compute units: the GeForce 940MX has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 render output units (ROPs). The Radeon R7 M260 has fewer of these resources, with 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs.

The memory subsystems also tell a story of divergence. The GeForce 940MX uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, achieving a bandwidth of 40.10 GB/s. The Radeon R7 M260 also has 2 GB of memory and a 64-bit bus, but it uses slower DDR3 memory, resulting in a significantly lower bandwidth of just 14.40 GB/s. This is a major architectural difference that impacts performance. Furthermore, the NVIDIA GPU has a base clock of 795 MHz with a boost clock of 861 MHz, while the AMD GPU operates at higher frequencies, with a 940 MHz base and 980 MHz boost.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are starkly divided, with each GPU claiming a decisive victory in one benchmark. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX is the clear winner. Its score of 4939 dwarfs the AMD Radeon R7 M260’s 3708, resulting in a substantial 33.2% performance advantage. This suggests the 940MX’s Maxwell architecture is far more efficient at raw compute tasks that utilize OpenCL, likely due to its higher shading unit count and superior memory bandwidth.

The narrative flips completely in the Geekbench Vulkan benchmark. Here, the AMD Radeon R7 M260 takes the lead with a score of 5289, outperforming the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX’s 4749 by 10.2%. This is a surprising result, as the R7 M260 has fewer shading units and much lower memory bandwidth on paper. The data implies that the GCN 3.0 architecture has a significant advantage in handling Vulkan’s workload, possibly due to better driver optimization or a more efficient command processor for this API.

These two results show that the "winner" depends entirely on the workload. The 940MX’s 33.2% lead in OpenCL is a massive margin, indicating dominance in compute-heavy applications. Conversely, the R7 M260’s 10.2% lead in Vulkan, while smaller, is still a clear and important win for graphics-centric tasks in modern APIs. The average benchmark scores reflect this split, with the 940MX’s 4844 average being 7.7% higher than the R7 M260’s 4499, driven primarily by its exceptional OpenCL performance.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear but nuanced verdict: neither GPU is a universal winner, and the choice hinges on the user’s primary applications. For anyone whose workload involves OpenCL compute—such as certain content creation tasks, scientific simulations, or GPU-accelerated encoding—the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX is the definitive choice. Its 33.2% lead in the OpenCL benchmark is a decisive advantage that cannot be overlooked. The data shows it is also the overall higher performer, with an average benchmark score of 4844 that places it in the 28th percentile, above the R7 M260’s 26th percentile.

However, for users who prioritize gaming or applications that leverage the Vulkan API, the AMD Radeon R7 M260 is the better option. Its 10.2% lead in the Vulkan benchmark indicates a tangible performance edge in this modern graphics interface. The R7 M260’s support for DirectX 12 (12_0) also gives it a potential feature-level advantage in newer games, whereas the 940MX is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0). Ultimately, a user focused on compute should choose the 940MX, while a user focused on modern graphics APIs should pick the R7 M260.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification field. The NVIDIA GeForce 940MX is built on the Maxwell architecture with a GM107 chip, while the AMD Radeon R7 M260 uses the GCN 3.0 architecture with a Topaz chip. The NVIDIA part has a larger die size of 148 mm² and more transistors at 1,870 million, compared to the AMD’s 125 mm² and 1,550 million. The shading unit count differs, with NVIDIA having 512 units versus AMD’s 384. TMUs also differ, with NVIDIA having 32 and AMD having 24, while both have 8 ROPs.

Clock speeds are another point of divergence. The GeForce 940MX has a lower base clock of 795 MHz and a boost clock of 861 MHz, while the Radeon R7 M260 has a higher base clock of 940 MHz and a boost of 980 MHz. The memory configuration is a significant difference: the 940MX uses GDDR5 with a bandwidth of 40.10 GB/s, while the R7 M260 uses DDR3 with a bandwidth of 14.40 GB/s. Both have 2 GB of memory on a 64-bit bus. The pixel rate is lower for NVIDIA at 6.888 GPixel/s, while AMD achieves 7.840 GPixel/s. Texture rate is higher for NVIDIA at 27.55 GTexel/s, versus AMD’s 23.52 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is also higher for NVIDIA at 881.7 GFLOPS, compared to AMD’s 752.6 GFLOPS.

Finally, the API support differs. The GeForce 940MX supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Radeon R7 M260 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The TDP is listed as 23 W for the NVIDIA chip, but no TDP is provided for the AMD chip. The GeForce 940MX has a slot width of "MXM Module" and a release date of 2016-06-27, while the R7 M260 has no slot width listed and a release date of 2014-06-10.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data creates a clear and simple use-case split between these two GPUs. The NVIDIA GeForce 940MX wins in scenarios that demand high raw compute throughput. Its 33.2% advantage in the OpenCL benchmark is the single biggest performance gap in the comparison. This makes it the superior choice for any application that relies heavily on OpenCL for general-purpose GPU computing. Furthermore, its higher texture rate of 27.55 GTexel/s and FP32 performance of 881.7 GFLOPS suggest it can handle complex shaders and compute tasks more efficiently. Its higher average benchmark score of 4844 also makes it the default pick for users seeking the better overall performer.

The AMD Radeon R7 M260 wins in scenarios that leverage the Vulkan graphics API. Its 10.2% lead in the Geekbench Vulkan benchmark is the primary indicator of this advantage. This makes it the better option for users running Vulkan-based games or applications. Additionally, its support for DirectX 12 (12_0) provides a feature-level advantage over the 940MX’s DirectX 12 (11_0) support, suggesting better compatibility with the latest DirectX 12 titles. The R7 M260 also has a higher pixel rate of 7.840 GPixel/s, which can be beneficial for fill-rate-intensive rendering tasks. In summary, the 940MX is the compute champion, while the R7 M260 is the modern graphics API specialist.