AMD Radeon R7 M260 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a split decision. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 wins the OpenCL test decisively, while the AMD Radeon R7 M260 takes the Vulkan test by a slightly smaller margin. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 650 scores 4545 against the R7 M260's 3708, a delta of 18.4% in NVIDIA's favor. That is a substantial gap, and it aligns with the GTX 650's broader compute credentials. The Vulkan result flips the script: the R7 M260 scores 5289, while the GTX 650 manages 4524, giving AMD a 16.9% advantage. Across the two recorded head-to-head tests, each GPU claims one win.

The average benchmark score tells a different story. The R7 M260 posts an average of 4499, while the GTX 650 sits at 3823. That puts the AMD part roughly 17.7% higher on average, despite losing the OpenCL matchup. The reason is the Vulkan score: the R7 M260's 5289 is far above both its own OpenCL result and every GTX 650 number. The GTX 650's three recorded benchmarks are 4545 in OpenCL, 4524 in Vulkan, and 2400 in Metal. The Metal score drags its average down considerably. The R7 M260 has no Metal result in the database, so its average relies entirely on the two tests where it was measured.

Percentile placement reinforces the overall picture. The R7 M260 sits at the 26th percentile among all GPUs, while the GTX 650 is at the 22nd. These are close positions in the low-to-mid range, but the AMD part edges ahead. In terms of nearest rivals, the R7 M260's average of 4499 is nearly identical to the AMD FirePro W4190M at 4505, a delta of only 0.1%. It also trails the Intel HD Graphics P530 by 1.3% and the AMD Radeon RX 560 by 1.5%. The GTX 650's closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 at 3834, a 0.3% gap, with the Intel UHD Graphics 710 just 0.8% behind. Both cards are clustered tightly among their peers, but the R7 M260's slightly higher average and percentile give it the edge in the aggregate.

The OpenCL result is the clearest single-test victory for NVIDIA. An 18.4% lead in that workload suggests the GTX 650's architecture handles general compute tasks more efficiently. The Vulkan result is the counterweight: AMD's 16.9% lead shows the R7 M260 is not simply a weaker part across the board. It wins the modern graphics API test by a meaningful margin. Between these two, the database records one win for each, so neither card can claim overall dominance from the head-to-head data alone.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 650 wins in OpenCL compute workloads. Its score of 4545 versus 3708 represents an 18.4% advantage, which is the largest single-test gap in the comparison. For applications that rely on OpenCL acceleration, the NVIDIA card is the stronger choice. The GTX 650 also has a higher pixel rate at 8.464 GPixel/s versus 7.840 GPixel/s, and a much higher texture rate at 33.86 GTexel/s versus 23.52 GTexel/s. Those fillrate figures support its advantage in traditional rasterization workloads.

The R7 M260 wins in Vulkan. Its 5289 score is 16.9% ahead of the GTX 650's 4524. Vulkan is a lower-level graphics API, and the AMD card's performance there indicates better driver optimization or architectural efficiency for that workload. The R7 M260 also has a higher average benchmark score overall, 4499 versus 3823, and a higher percentile rank at 26 versus 22. For users whose primary applications leverage Vulkan, the AMD part is the better performer.

The GTX 650's Metal score of 2400 is notable only in that it is far lower than its other results. The R7 M260 has no Metal benchmark in the database, so a direct comparison in that API is not possible. The GTX 650's three-test average is dragged down by that Metal number, while the R7 M260's two-test average benefits from its strong Vulkan showing. If the database included a Metal result for the R7 M260, the averages could shift, but as recorded, the AMD card holds the higher mean.

In terms of memory bandwidth, the GTX 650 is the clear victor. It offers 80.00 GB/s against the R7 M260's 14.40 GB/s. That is a fivefold difference, and it explains why the GTX 650 performs better in bandwidth-sensitive OpenCL tasks. The R7 M260 counters with double the memory capacity at 2 GB versus 1024 MB, which helps in workloads that exceed 1 GB of video memory. Neither card is a high-end part, but the GTX 650 is better suited to compute-heavy or bandwidth-hungry tasks, while the R7 M260 is better for Vulkan-based workloads and larger frame buffers.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers and different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon R7 M260 is built on GCN 3.0, using the Topaz chip, and belongs to the Gem System generation within the R7 M200 family. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 uses the Kepler architecture with the GK106 chip, part of the GeForce 600 generation. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, so the process node is identical.

The transistor counts differ substantially. The GTX 650 packs 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, while the R7 M260 has 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die. The NVIDIA chip is larger in both absolute and die-size terms. Transistor density is slightly higher on the AMD side at 12.4M per mm² versus 11.5M per mm². The GTX 650's larger die and higher transistor count give it more raw hardware, which shows in its fillrate and memory bandwidth figures.

Shading units are identical at 384 for both cards. The GTX 650 has 32 texture mapping units and 16 raster output units, while the R7 M260 has 24 TMUs and 8 ROPs. The GTX 650's higher TMU and ROP counts directly contribute to its superior texture rate of 33.86 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 8.464 GPixel/s. The R7 M260's 24 TMUs and 8 ROPs yield 23.52 GTexel/s and 7.840 GPixel/s, respectively.

Memory subsystems are radically different. The R7 M260 uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 650 uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 80.00 GB/s. The GTX 650's memory clock is 1250 MHz with 5 Gbps effective, while the R7 M260 runs at 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective. GDDR5 versus DDR3 and a 128-bit versus 64-bit bus explain the massive bandwidth gap.

The R7 M260's core clocks are listed at 940 MHz base and 980 MHz boost. The GTX 650 has no base or boost clock listed in the database, so a direct clock comparison is not possible from the recorded data. The AMD card's FP32 performance is 752.6 GFLOPS, with FP16 at the same figure, indicating a 1:1 ratio. The GTX 650's FP32 is 812.5 GFLOPS, slightly higher, and no FP16 figure is recorded.

API support differs in an important way. The R7 M260 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the GTX 650 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). That means the AMD card meets the higher feature level for DirectX 12. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Vulkan versions are close: the R7 M260 lists 1.2.170, and the GTX 650 lists 1.2.175. The GTX 650 has a higher Vulkan version number, but the R7 M260's Vulkan benchmark score is significantly better.

The GTX 650 has a TDP of 65 W, requires a single 6-pin power connector, and suggests a 250 W power supply. It is a single-slot card with a length of 147 mm or 5.8 inches. Display outputs include 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2. The R7 M260 has no TDP, slot width, power connector, or display output data recorded. The GTX 650 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the R7 M260 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The GTX 650's wider bus interface is another factor in its bandwidth advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260 has an average benchmark score of 4499, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 averages 3823.

Q: How big is the OpenCL performance gap?

A: The GTX 650 scores 4545 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 18.4% higher than the R7 M260's 3708.

Q: Does the R7 M260 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the R7 M260 wins Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 5289, which is 16.9% ahead of the GTX 650's 4524.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures for each card?

A: The GTX 650 offers 80.00 GB/s of bandwidth from 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The R7 M260 offers 14.40 GB/s from 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus.

Q: Which card has more texture mapping units?

A: The GTX 650 has 32 TMUs, while the R7 M260 has 24 TMUs. The GTX 650 also has 16 ROPs versus 8 ROPs on the R7 M260.

Q: What DirectX feature levels do the cards support?

A: The R7 M260 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the GTX 650 supports DirectX 12 (11_0).

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R7 M260 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Kepler |

| Chip | Topaz | GK106 |

| Generation | Gem System (R7 M200) | GeForce 600 |

| Transistors | 1,550 million | 2,540 million |

| Die Size | 125 mm² | 221 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.4M / mm² | 11.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 940 MHz | Not recorded |

| Boost Clock | 980 MHz | Not recorded |

| Memory Clock | 900 MHz, 1800 Mbps effective | 1250 MHz, 5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 14.40 GB/s | 80.00 GB/s |

| TMUs | 24 | 32 |

| ROPs | 8 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.840 GPixel/s | 8.464 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 23.52 GTexel/s | 33.86 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 752.6 GFLOPS | 812.5 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 752.6 GFLOPS (1:1) | Not recorded |

| TDP | Not recorded | 65 W |

| Slot Width | Not recorded | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not recorded | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not recorded | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Not recorded | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.2.175 |

| Release Date | 2014-06-10 | 2013-11-26 |

| Predecessor | Solar System | GeForce 500 |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | GeForce 700 |

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload. For OpenCL compute and bandwidth-intensive tasks, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 is the stronger pick. Its 18.4% OpenCL lead, 80.00 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and higher fillrates make it the better choice for applications that stress those resources. The GTX 650 also has a wider PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, more TMUs and ROPs, and higher FP32 throughput at 812.5 GFLOPS versus 752.6 GFLOPS.

For Vulkan-based workloads, the AMD Radeon R7 M260 is the better option. Its 16.9% Vulkan advantage and higher average benchmark score of 4499 versus 3823 indicate stronger modern API performance. The R7 M260 also offers 2 GB of memory, double the GTX 650's capacity, which matters for workloads that exceed 1 GB. Its DirectX 12 (12_0) support is a higher feature level than the GTX 650's 12 (11_0).

The GTX 650 is a desktop card with a 65 W TDP, single-slot design, and a 250 W suggested power supply. The R7 M260 is a mobile part with no power or physical dimensions recorded. That distinction matters for system builders. The GTX 650 is a plug-in card with known power requirements, while the R7 M260's integration context is not specified in the database.

Overall, the GTX 650 wins on raw compute and memory bandwidth, while the R7 M260 wins on Vulkan performance and overall average score. Users prioritizing OpenCL or traditional rasterization should choose the GTX 650. Users prioritizing Vulkan or needing more video memory should choose the R7 M260. The database records one head-to-head win for each, so the verdict depends entirely on the target workload.