AMD Radeon R7 M260 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2100M Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 M260 and NVIDIA Quadro K2100M are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from the 2013-2014 era, but the benchmark data reveals they are not direct equivalents. The R7 M260 posts an average benchmark score of 4499, placing it in the 26th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro K2100M averages 4151, sitting in the 25th percentile. Despite the R7 M260’s higher average, the head-to-head results show a split decision: the Quadro K2100M wins decisively in OpenCL, while the Radeon R7 M260 takes a significant victory in Vulkan. This divergence points to fundamentally different architectural strengths rather than a simple performance hierarchy.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking single result is in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M scores 4587 against the AMD Radeon R7 M260’s 3708. That is a 19.2% advantage for NVIDIA, a substantial margin that dwarfs the overall average score gap between the two cards. The Quadro K2100M’s OpenCL result is actually 436 points higher than its own average benchmark score of 4151, suggesting that compute workloads are a particular strength for this Kepler-based part. In contrast, the R7 M260’s OpenCL score of 3708 is well below its 4499 average, indicating that this specific test does not play to AMD’s architectural advantages.

The inverse is true in the Geekbench Vulkan test. Here, the AMD Radeon R7 M260 produces a score of 5289, which is 21.8% higher than the Quadro K2100M’s 4343. This is a remarkable turnaround — the R7 M260 outperforms its own average by 790 points in Vulkan, while the Quadro K2100M falls 192 points short of its own average. The 21.8% delta is nearly identical in magnitude to NVIDIA’s OpenCL lead, but in the opposite direction. These two tests paint a picture of a card that excels at modern low-level APIs (Vulkan) versus one that dominates legacy compute APIs (OpenCL).

Looking at the nearest rivals for context, the R7 M260’s average score of 4499 sits within a tight cluster: the AMD FirePro W4190M scores 4505 (0.1% higher), the Intel HD Graphics P530 scores 4560 (1.3% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 560 scores 4569 (1.5% higher). The R7 M260 is essentially tied with these parts, differing by less than 2% in either direction. The Quadro K2100M’s 4151 average is similarly clustered, with the AMD Radeon R5 M330 at 4170 (0.4% higher) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti at 4193 (1% higher). Interestingly, the R7 M260’s closest rival list includes the R5 M230 at 4577, which is 1.7% faster, while the Quadro K2100M’s list includes the Intel HD Graphics 630 at 4075, which is 1.9% slower.

The win count is exactly even at one apiece. The Quadro K2100M takes the OpenCL test by 879 raw points, and the R7 M260 takes the Vulkan test by 946 raw points. This symmetry in win margin — roughly 900 points in either direction — suggests that the choice between these two cards depends entirely on the workload. For users running OpenCL-accelerated applications, the Quadro K2100M is the clear winner. For those leveraging Vulkan, the R7 M260 offers a meaningful performance lead.

The Verdict

The data does not support a single “better” card; it supports two different use cases. The AMD Radeon R7 M260 is the pick for modern API workloads. Its Vulkan score of 5289 is not only 21.8% ahead of the Quadro K2100M but also the single highest raw score recorded for either card across all tests. Users running Vulkan-based games or compute applications will see a tangible performance benefit. The R7 M260 also has the higher average benchmark score (4499 vs. 4151) and the higher percentile ranking (26th vs. 25th), which indicates slightly better overall consistency across mixed workloads.

The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M is the pick for OpenCL-centric tasks. Its 4587 OpenCL score is 19.2% ahead of the R7 M260 and represents the card’s best result by a wide margin. For professional applications that rely on OpenCL — a common scenario in older engineering and scientific software — the Quadro K2100M delivers measurably superior compute throughput. Its 55 W TDP is also explicitly listed, whereas the R7 M260 has no TDP figure in the data, suggesting the NVIDIA part may be easier to integrate into power-constrained mobile chassis.

For gamers, the Vulkan result is likely more relevant, as modern game engines increasingly adopt this API. The R7 M260’s 21.8% Vulkan lead is substantial and would translate to higher frame rates in Vulkan-titled games. For legacy software or GPU compute in OpenCL, the Quadro K2100M’s 19.2% lead is equally significant. Neutral analysis of the benchmark results indicates that the R7 M260 is the better all-rounder due to its higher average score and superior modern API performance, but the Quadro K2100M is the better specialist for OpenCL workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. AMD’s R7 M260 uses GCN 3.0, specifically the Topaz chip, while NVIDIA’s Quadro K2100M uses Kepler, based on the GK106S die. Both are manufactured on TSMC’s 28 nm process, but the underlying designs diverge sharply. The R7 M260 packs 1,550 million transistors into a 125 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.4 million per mm². The Quadro K2100M is a much larger chip, with 2,540 million transistors across a 221 mm² die, giving it a lower density of 11.5 million per mm².

These architectural choices manifest in different compute configurations. The R7 M260 has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 raster operation units (ROPs). The Quadro K2100M counters with 576 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Despite having 50% more shading units and double the TMUs and ROPs, the Quadro K2100M’s raw FP32 throughput is only marginally higher: 768.4 GFLOPS versus 752.6 GFLOPS for the R7 M260. This is due to clock speeds — the R7 M260 runs at 940 MHz base and 980 MHz boost, while the Quadro K2100M is locked at 667 MHz for both base and boost.

The R7 M260 supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 752.6 GFLOPS, whereas the Quadro K2100M has no listed FP16 capability. This makes the AMD part more flexible for half-precision workloads. The R7 M260 also has a more modern API feature set, supporting DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the Quadro K2100M only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The R7 M260’s GCN 3.0 architecture is the newer design, which explains its Vulkan advantage despite the NVIDIA card’s larger silicon.

Specification Differences

The most consequential specification difference is memory bandwidth. The Quadro K2100M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 48.13 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M260 uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, yielding only 14.40 GB/s — a 3.3x deficit. This bandwidth gap is likely a major contributor to the Quadro K2100M’s OpenCL lead, as compute workloads are often memory-bound. The Quadro K2100M’s memory runs at 752 MHz (3 Gbps effective), while the R7 M260’s memory runs at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), but the bus width difference overwhelms the clock advantage.

Pixel and texture rates reinforce this pattern. The Quadro K2100M achieves 8.004 GPixel/s and 32.02 GTexel/s, while the R7 M260 manages 7.840 GPixel/s and 23.52 GTexel/s. The pixel rates are nearly identical, but the Quadro K2100M has a 36% lead in texture throughput, again driven by its doubled TMU count and higher memory bandwidth. The R7 M260’s base clock of 940 MHz is significantly higher than the Quadro K2100M’s 667 MHz, but this cannot compensate for the NVIDIA card’s superior memory subsystem.

The two cards also differ in interface and power characteristics. The R7 M260 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the Quadro K2100M uses MXM-A (3.0) and is explicitly listed as an MXM Module with no power connectors required. The Quadro K2100M has a TDP of 55 W, while the R7 M260 has no TDP listed. Display outputs are listed as “Portable Device Dependent” for the Quadro K2100M, with no equivalent information for the R7 M260. Both cards are end-of-life, with the R7 M260 releasing on 2014-06-10 and the Quadro K2100M on 2013-07-22.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260 has an average benchmark score of 4499, which is 348 points higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M’s 4151 average.

Q: How much faster is the Quadro K2100M in OpenCL?

A: The Quadro K2100M scores 4587 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 19.2% higher than the R7 M260’s 3708 score in the same test.

Q: Is the Radeon R7 M260 ahead in any benchmark?

A: Yes, the R7 M260 scores 5289 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 21.8% higher than the Quadro K2100M’s 4343 result in that test.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The Quadro K2100M has 48.13 GB/s of bandwidth from its GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, while the R7 M260 has 14.40 GB/s from DDR3 on a 64-bit bus.

Q: How do their shading unit counts compare?

A: The Quadro K2100M has 576 shading units, while the R7 M260 has 384 shading units — a 50% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Which card has a lower TDP?

A: The Quadro K2100M has a listed TDP of 55 W, while the R7 M260 has no TDP figure provided in the data.