AMD Radeon R7 M260 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M has an average benchmark score of 5236, while the AMD Radeon R7 M260 scores 4499. This places the GTX 760M at the 31st percentile among all GPUs, compared to the 26th percentile for the R7 M260.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in OpenCL performance?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 760M scores 5604, which is 51.1% higher than the R7 M260's score of 3708. This is the largest performance gap recorded between the two.

Q: Does the AMD GPU win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the R7 M260 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 5289, which is 8% higher than the GTX 760M's 4868. The head-to-head results are split, with each GPU winning one test.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each GPU based on average score?

A: For the GTX 760M, the nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M at 5211 (0.5% behind), followed by the GeForce 940M at 5284 (0.9% ahead). For the R7 M260, the closest rival is the AMD FirePro W4190M at 4505 (0.1% ahead), with the Intel HD Graphics P530 at 4560 (1.3% ahead).

Q: What are the memory configurations of each GPU?

A: The GTX 760M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.13 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M260 also has 2 GB, but it uses DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing only 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has the higher pixel and texture rates?

A: The GTX 760M has a pixel rate of 11.50 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 46.02 GTexel/s. The R7 M260 has a pixel rate of 7.840 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 23.52 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA GPU leads in both metrics.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M is built on the Kepler architecture using the GK106S chip, while the AMD Radeon R7 M260 uses the GCN 3.0 architecture with the Topaz chip. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the transistor counts differ significantly. The GTX 760M contains 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 11.5M per mm². The R7 M260 has 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, yielding a higher density of 12.4M per mm².

The compute resources are substantially different. The GTX 760M has 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The R7 M260 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This means the NVIDIA GPU has exactly double the shading units and more than double the texture units, which directly contributes to its higher fill rates.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The GTX 760M operates at a base clock of 628 MHz with a boost of 719 MHz. The R7 M260 runs at a much higher base clock of 940 MHz, boosting to 980 MHz. Despite the higher clocks on the AMD side, the NVIDIA GPU still achieves higher overall throughput due to its larger compute configuration.

Memory architecture is another major differentiator. The GTX 760M uses GDDR5 memory at 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective) with a 128-bit bus. The R7 M260 uses DDR3 memory at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) with a 64-bit bus. The bandwidth gap is enormous: 64.13 GB/s for NVIDIA versus 14.40 GB/s for AMD.

The bus interface also differs. The GTX 760M uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the R7 M260 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. In terms of API support, the GTX 760M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The R7 M260 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The AMD GPU has a higher DirectX feature level, while the NVIDIA GPU has a slightly newer Vulkan version.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear split in performance depending on the workload. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 760M delivers a score of 5604, which is 51.1% higher than the R7 M260's 3708. This is a commanding lead and represents the largest performance delta in any comparison involving these two GPUs. The OpenCL result aligns with the raw compute specifications, where the GTX 760M has double the shading units and more than double the texture units.

However, the Vulkan test reverses the outcome. The R7 M260 scores 5289, which is 8% higher than the GTX 760M's 4868. This is a notable result because it shows the AMD GPU is capable of outperforming the NVIDIA GPU in at least one modern graphics API workload. The Vulkan advantage for the R7 M260 may be attributed to its newer GCN 3.0 architecture, which supports DirectX 12 (12_0) compared to the GTX 760M's DirectX 12 (11_0) support.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the GTX 760M has an average score of 5236, which puts it 16.4% ahead of the R7 M260's 4499. The nearest rival data reinforces this positioning. The GTX 760M sits within 1.5% of several NVIDIA and AMD parts, including the Quadro 4000M at 5211, the GeForce 940M at 5284, the GTX 980M at 5308, and the R7 M260X at 5161. The R7 M260's nearest rivals are all within 1.7% of its score, including the FirePro W4190M at 4505, the HD Graphics P530 at 4560, the RX 560 at 4569, and the R5 M230 at 4577.

The data suggests that the GTX 760M is positioned in a slightly higher performance tier overall, but the R7 M260's Vulkan win demonstrates that API-specific optimizations can significantly alter the balance.

The Verdict

Based on the recorded data, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M is the stronger overall performer. Its average benchmark score of 5236 exceeds the R7 M260's 4499 by a margin of 16.4%. The GTX 760M also holds a decisive 51.1% lead in OpenCL performance, which is the more demanding of the two tests in terms of raw compute throughput.

The AMD Radeon R7 M260 does have a legitimate claim in Vulkan workloads, where it leads by 8%. This makes it a viable option for applications that are heavily optimized for the Vulkan API and can leverage the GCN 3.0 architecture's DirectX 12 (12_0) feature level.

The percentile rankings reinforce this conclusion. The GTX 760M sits at the 31st percentile among all GPUs, while the R7 M260 sits at the 26th percentile. This five-point gap in percentile ranking indicates that the NVIDIA GPU outperforms a larger portion of the GPU population.

The memory subsystem is a critical factor. The GTX 760M's GDDR5 memory with 64.13 GB/s of bandwidth is over four times faster than the R7 M260's DDR3 memory at 14.40 GB/s. This bandwidth advantage is likely to be noticeable in texture-heavy workloads and high-resolution rendering.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: GK106S (NVIDIA) versus Topaz (AMD)
• Architecture: Kepler versus GCN 3.0
• Generation: GeForce 700M versus Gem System (R7 M200)
• Transistors: 2,540 million versus 1,550 million
• Die Size: 221 mm² versus 125 mm²
• Transistor Density: 11.5M / mm² versus 12.4M / mm²
• Base Clock: 628 MHz versus 940 MHz
• Boost Clock: 719 MHz versus 980 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective) versus 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective)
• Memory Type: GDDR5 versus DDR3
• Memory Bus Width: 128 bit versus 64 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 64.13 GB/s versus 14.40 GB/s
• Shading Units: 768 versus 384
• Texture Mapping Units: 64 versus 24
• ROP Units: 16 versus 8
• Pixel Rate: 11.50 GPixel/s versus 7.840 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 46.02 GTexel/s versus 23.52 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 1,104.4 GFLOPS versus 752.6 GFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: Not available (null) versus 752.6 GFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 55 W versus not available (null)
• Slot Width: MXM Module versus not available (null)
• Power Connectors: None versus not available (null)
• Bus Interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x8
• DirectX Support: 12 (11_0) versus 12 (12_0)
• Vulkan Support: 1.2.175 versus 1.2.170
• Release Date: 2013-05-29 versus 2014-06-10
• Predecessor: GeForce 600M versus Solar System
• Successor: GeForce 800M versus Polaris Mobile

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M wins in scenarios that demand raw compute throughput and high memory bandwidth. Its OpenCL score of 5604 is more than 50% higher than the AMD GPU, making it the clear choice for OpenCL-based applications such as general-purpose GPU computing, video encoding, and physics simulations. The 64.13 GB/s of memory bandwidth is a substantial advantage for workloads that are memory-bound, such as large texture datasets and high-resolution frame buffers. The GTX 760M also leads in pixel rate (11.50 GPixel/s versus 7.840 GPixel/s) and texture rate (46.02 GTexel/s versus 23.52 GTexel/s), which translates to better performance in traditional rasterization workloads.

The AMD Radeon R7 M260 wins specifically in Vulkan-based workloads. Its Vulkan score of 5289 is 8% higher than the GTX 760M's 4868. This indicates that the GCN 3.0 architecture has better optimization for Vulkan API calls, possibly due to its higher DirectX feature level (12_0). The R7 M260 also has a higher base and boost clock, which can help in lightly threaded or latency-sensitive tasks. Its FP16 performance is listed as 752.6 GFLOPS (1:1), matching its FP32 output, which may benefit applications that use half-precision arithmetic.

For users running a mix of workloads, the GTX 760M is the safer choice given its higher average score and percentile ranking. The R7 M260 is only preferable when Vulkan is the primary API and the application is known to favor AMD's architecture. The data does not support the R7 M260 as a general-purpose replacement for the GTX 760M, as the NVIDIA GPU holds a 16.4% lead in average benchmark score.