AMD Radeon R7 M260 vs NVIDIA Quadro P400 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro P400 and AMD Radeon R7 M260 are both end-of-life mobile and entry-level desktop graphics solutions, but the benchmark data reveals they have sharply different strengths. The Quadro P400 leads in OpenCL compute, while the Radeon R7 M260 edges ahead in Vulkan, making the choice entirely dependent on the workload. The data shows a 1-1 split in head-to-head wins, with the average benchmark scores differing by only 4.1% in favor of the NVIDIA card.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two benchmark results paint a clear picture of divergent strengths. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Quadro P400 scores 4249, defeating the AMD Radeon R7 M260’s 3708 by a substantial 14.6% margin. This is the largest performance gap in either direction, and it establishes the Quadro P400 as the superior compute card for general-purpose GPU workloads that rely on OpenCL.

However, the story reverses in the Geekbench Vulkan test. Here, the AMD Radeon R7 M260 scores 5289, topping the Quadro P400’s 5119 by 3.2%. While the margin is smaller than the OpenCL gap, it is still a decisive win for AMD in this specific API. This suggests that the R7 M260 has a more efficient implementation for Vulkan’s lower-level graphics and compute paths, despite being an older design.

Looking at the broader context, the Quadro P400’s average benchmark score is 4684, placing it at the 27th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, which scores 4657 (a 0.6% difference), and the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX, which beats it by 0.9% with a score of 4727. The Radeon R7 M260, meanwhile, averages 4499, putting it at the 26th percentile. Its closest competitor is the AMD FirePro W4190M at 4505 (a -0.1% delta), with the Intel HD Graphics P530 trailing by 1.3% at 4560.

These percentile positions show both cards are firmly in entry-level territory, but the Quadro P400 holds a slight edge in overall average performance. The 14.6% OpenCL win is the standout statistic for NVIDIA, while the 3.2% Vulkan win for AMD prevents a complete sweep, proving that the R7 M260 is not without its merits.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 M260 is the clear winner for Vulkan-based applications. If a workload uses the Vulkan API, the R7 M260’s 5289 score provides a measurable advantage over the Quadro P400’s 5119. The data indicates that users running modern Vulkan titles or compute tasks through this API should expect better performance from the AMD card, even though it is an older product.

The NVIDIA Quadro P400 dominates in OpenCL compute tasks. Its 4249 score versus 3708 for the R7 M260 represents a 14.6% lead, which is significant for any application that leverages OpenCL for acceleration. This includes many professional workloads, scientific computing, and media processing tasks that rely on this API. For users in these fields, the Quadro P400 is the better option by a wide margin.

For general-purpose use without a specific API dependency, the average benchmark scores favor the Quadro P400. The NVIDIA card averages 4684 across both tests, while the AMD card averages 4499. This 185-point difference, while small, indicates that the Quadro P400 is the more balanced performer on average. The R7 M260’s Vulkan advantage is real but narrow, whereas the Quadro P400’s OpenCL advantage is much more pronounced.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and manufacturing processes. The NVIDIA Quadro P400 is built on the Pascal architecture using the GP107 chip, manufactured on Samsung’s 14 nm process. It packs 3,300 million transistors into a 132 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 25.0 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon R7 M260 uses the older GCN 3.0 architecture with the Topaz chip, built on TSMC’s 28 nm process. It contains 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, with a density of just 12.4 million per square millimeter.

These architectural differences lead to significant performance characteristic variations. The Quadro P400 has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The R7 M260, despite having more shading units at 384 and more TMUs at 24, has only 8 ROPs. This explains the massive difference in pixel rate: the Quadro P400 achieves 20.03 GPixel/s, while the R7 M260 manages only 7.84 GPixel/s. The texture rates are closer, with the Quadro P400 at 20.03 GTexel/s and the R7 M260 at 23.52 GTexel/s, reflecting the AMD card’s higher TMU count.

Clock speeds also differ notably. The Quadro P400 runs at a base clock of 1228 MHz with a boost of 1252 MHz, while the R7 M260 operates at 940 MHz base and 980 MHz boost. The memory subsystems are entirely different as well. The Quadro P400 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, achieving 32.06 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M260 also has 2 GB, but it uses DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, resulting in only 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth — less than half of the NVIDIA card.

Compute performance is where the cards take divergent paths. The Quadro P400 delivers 641.0 GFLOPS of FP32 performance but only 10.02 GFLOPS of FP16 (a 1:64 ratio). The R7 M260 offers slightly higher FP32 at 752.6 GFLOPS but matches that with 752.6 GFLOPS of FP16 (a 1:1 ratio). This suggests the AMD card has more balanced compute capabilities, though the NVIDIA card’s design is more specialized for FP32 workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P400 has a higher average benchmark score of 4684, compared to the AMD Radeon R7 M260’s 4499.

Q: Is the AMD Radeon R7 M260 better in any test?

A: Yes, the R7 M260 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 5289, beating the Quadro P400’s 5119 by 3.2%.

Q: What is the biggest performance difference between the two cards?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the NVIDIA Quadro P400 scores 4249 versus 3708 for the AMD card, a 14.6% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260 has 384 shading units, while the NVIDIA Quadro P400 has 256.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The Quadro P400 has 32.06 GB/s of bandwidth using GDDR5, while the R7 M260 has 14.40 GB/s using DDR3, making the NVIDIA card over twice as fast.

Q: What are the process nodes for each card?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P400 is built on a 14 nm process, while the AMD Radeon R7 M260 uses a 28 nm process.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro P400 | AMD Radeon R7 M260 |

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

| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 3.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 3,300 million | 1,550 million |

| Die Size | 132 mm² | 125 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 25.0M / mm² | 12.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1228 MHz | 940 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1252 MHz | 980 MHz |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 32.06 GB/s | 14.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 256 | 384 |

| TMUs | 16 | 24 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 20.03 GPixel/s | 7.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 20.03 GTexel/s | 23.52 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 641.0 GFLOPS | 752.6 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 10.02 GFLOPS (1:64) | 752.6 GFLOPS (1:1) |

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

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Display Outputs | 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | None specified |

| Power Connectors | None | None specified |

| TDP | 30 W | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2017-02-06 | 2014-06-10 |

The Verdict

The data supports a clear conclusion: choose the NVIDIA Quadro P400 if your primary workload relies on OpenCL, and choose the AMD Radeon R7 M260 if Vulkan performance is paramount. The Quadro P400’s 14.6% OpenCL advantage is decisive, and its higher average benchmark score of 4684 versus 4499 for the R7 M260 makes it the better overall performer.

However, the AMD card is not without reason for selection. Its 3.2% Vulkan win shows that it has a specific use case where it outperforms the NVIDIA offering. For users running Vulkan-based applications, the R7 M260 is the better choice, despite its older architecture and lower average score.

The Quadro P400 also offers superior memory bandwidth (32.06 GB/s versus 14.40 GB/s), a higher pixel rate (20.03 GPixel/s versus 7.84 GPixel/s), and a newer manufacturing process (14 nm versus 28 nm). These factors contribute to its better overall performance and efficiency. The R7 M260 counters with more shading units, higher FP32 and FP16 compute, and a larger texture rate, but these advantages do not translate into benchmark wins outside of Vulkan.

For professional users needing OpenCL acceleration, the Quadro P400 is the obvious pick. For gamers or users stuck on Vulkan-only workloads, the R7 M260 offers a small but measurable edge. Given that the average benchmark score favors the NVIDIA card by 185 points, and the OpenCL delta is much larger than the Vulkan delta, the Quadro P400 is the safer recommendation for general use. The R7 M260 is a niche choice for specific Vulkan scenarios, but the data does not support choosing it for any other purpose.