AMD Radeon R7 M260 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M and AMD Radeon R7 M260 represent two very different tiers of mobile graphics from the same era. The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap, with the GTX 970M winning both head-to-head tests by overwhelming margins. The GeForce OpenCL score of 18,946 is 410.9% higher than the Radeon's 3,708, while the Vulkan score of 18,292 beats 5,289 by 245.8%. These are not close contests; the GTX 970M is in a completely different performance class.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two shared benchmark tests in the data are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the GTX 970M dominates both. In OpenCL, the NVIDIA part scores 18,946 versus 3,708 for the AMD part, a delta of 410.9%. This means the GTX 970M delivers more than five times the raw compute throughput in this test. The gap is slightly narrower in Vulkan, but still massive: 18,292 versus 5,289, a 245.8% advantage. The GTX 970M's Vulkan score alone is nearly 3.5 times the R7 M260's OpenCL result, underscoring how far ahead the NVIDIA part is across different API workloads.

Looking at the broader benchmark picture, the GTX 970M's average benchmark score is 4,628, which places it at the 27th percentile of all GPUs. The R7 M260's average is 4,499, at the 26th percentile. Despite the enormous head-to-head deltas, their average scores are remarkably close, differing by only 129 points. This suggests that the two GPUs occupy similar overall standings in the database, but the GTX 970M achieves this with far more consistent high-end compute performance, while the R7 M260's average is dragged up by other test scenarios not shared between them.

The GTX 970M also has a much richer benchmark history, with scores across Passmark DirectX 9/10/11/12, Passmark G2D, G3D, and GPU Compute. Its best Passmark result is 99 in DirectX 9, with G3D at 5,704 and GPU Compute at 2,289. The R7 M260 lacks these Passmark entries entirely, meaning the comparison is limited to the two Geekbench tests. In those, the GTX 970M's nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M, with an average score of 4,621 and a delta of just 0.2%. The R7 M260's closest competitor is the AMD FirePro W4190M at 4,505, a -0.1% delta, indicating the R7 M260 sits right at its expected performance level.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M is the superior GPU for any workload that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan compute. Its 410.9% lead in OpenCL and 245.8% lead in Vulkan are not incremental improvements; they represent a generational chasm. The GTX 970M also offers 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus with 120.3 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to the R7 M260's 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with just 14.40 GB/s. This memory configuration alone explains much of the compute disparity, as the NVIDIA part can feed its 1,280 shading units far more effectively than the AMD part can feed its 384.

For users seeking a mobile GPU capable of serious gaming or compute tasks, the GTX 970M is the only rational choice from these two. Its 2.657 TFLOPS of FP32 performance dwarfs the R7 M260's 752.6 GFLOPS, and its texture rate of 83.04 GTexel/s versus 23.52 GTexel/s reinforces the gap. The R7 M260, by contrast, is best suited for basic multimedia and light productivity, where its 26th percentile standing is acceptable. However, the GTX 970M's 27th percentile ranking is only nominally higher, suggesting that even the winner is not a high-end part by modern standards—it simply towers over this particular competitor.

The R7 M260's one technical advantage is its FP16 capability at 752.6 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, which the GTX 970M does not list. But this is irrelevant in the shared benchmarks, where the NVIDIA part still wins by over 200%. Data also shows the GTX 970M supports Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170 on the R7 M260, and DirectX 12_1 versus 12_0, giving it better API feature support. There is no scenario in the provided benchmarks where the R7 M260 wins, and the wins count is 2-0 in favor of NVIDIA.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M wins decisively with a score of 18,946 versus the AMD Radeon R7 M260's 3,708, a 410.9% advantage.

Q: What is the Vulkan performance difference?

A: The GTX 970M scores 18,292 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the R7 M260 scores 5,289, giving NVIDIA a 245.8% lead.

Q: Do both GPUs have similar overall standings?

A: Yes, their average benchmark scores are close: 4,628 for the GTX 970M (27th percentile) and 4,499 for the R7 M260 (26th percentile), despite the large head-to-head gaps.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 970M has 120.3 GB/s of bandwidth from 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, versus the R7 M260's 14.40 GB/s from 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus.

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference?

A: The GTX 970M delivers 2.657 TFLOPS, compared to the R7 M260's 752.6 GFLOPS, a difference of roughly 3.5 times in raw throughput.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer Vulkan version?

A: The GTX 970M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the R7 M260 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, giving NVIDIA a more modern API feature set.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The GTX 970M uses a GM204 chip with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, while the R7 M260 uses a Topaz chip with 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die. Transistor density is similar at 13.1M/mm² versus 12.4M/mm², but the NVIDIA part has over three times the total transistor count. Clock speeds are close at the base level (924 MHz versus 940 MHz), but the GTX 970M boosts to 1,038 MHz versus 980 MHz for the R7 M260.

Memory is where the gap widens: the GTX 970M has 6 GB of GDDR5 at 1,253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) on a 192-bit bus, yielding 120.3 GB/s. The R7 M260 has 2 GB of DDR3 at 900 MHz (1,800 Mbps effective) on a 64-bit bus, yielding only 14.40 GB/s. Core counts follow suit: the GTX 970M has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, versus 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs on the R7 M260. Pixel rate is 49.82 GPixel/s versus 7.84 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 83.04 GTexel/s versus 23.52 GTexel/s.

The GTX 970M uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface with a slot width of MXM Module, while the R7 M260 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent" for NVIDIA and null for AMD. The GTX 970M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4; the R7 M260 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 970M also has a higher FP32 rating at 2.657 TFLOPS versus 752.6 GFLOPS, and only the R7 M260 lists FP16 at 752.6 GFLOPS (1:1).

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is clear: the GTX 970M is built on NVIDIA's Maxwell 2.0 architecture, while the R7 M260 uses AMD's GCN 3.0. Both are fabricated on TSMC's 28 nm process, but the NVIDIA chip is far larger and more complex. The GM204 die measures 398 mm² with 5,200 million transistors, compared to the Topaz die at 125 mm² with 1,550 million transistors. This size difference reflects a substantially more powerful design, with the GTX 970M packing 1,280 shading units versus 384 on the R7 M260.

The GTX 970M's memory architecture is also fundamentally different: it uses GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, while the R7 M260 uses DDR3 on a 64-bit bus. This explains the 8.4x bandwidth advantage. The GTX 970M belongs to the GeForce 900M generation, succeeding GeForce 800M and preceding GeForce 10 Mobile. The R7 M260 is part of the Gem System (R7 M200) generation, succeeding Solar System and preceding Polaris Mobile. Both are end-of-life products, with the GTX 970M released in October 2014 and the R7 M260 in June 2014.

Feature support differs as well: the GTX 970M supports DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4, while the R7 M260 only reaches DirectX 12_0 and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 970M also lists no power connectors and an MXM Module slot width, indicating a modular laptop design, whereas the R7 M260 has no slot width or power connector data. The R7 M260's FP16 capability at a 1:1 ratio with FP32 is unique, but its lower overall compute and memory bandwidth make it a fundamentally weaker part. The data shows the GTX 970M's architecture is designed for high throughput, while the R7 M260 targets efficiency and basic tasks.