AMD Radeon R7 M260X vs AMD Radeon R8 M445DX Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260X has an average benchmark score of 5161, while the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX scores 4727. The R7 M260X leads by 434 points, which places it in the 30th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 27th percentile for the R8 M445DX.

Q: What is the difference in their DirectX support?

A: The R7 M260X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the R8 M445DX supports DirectX 12 (12_0). The R8 M445DX has a more complete DirectX 12 feature set, as indicated by the 12_0 version number versus the 11_1 version on the R7 M260X.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in raw compute performance?

A: The R8 M445DX delivers 653.4 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the R7 M260X delivers 549.1 GFLOPS. This means the R8 M445DX is approximately 19% ahead in theoretical floating-point throughput, despite having fewer shading units.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The R8 M445DX has a pixel rate of 8.168 GPixel/s, substantially higher than the R7 M260X's 5.720 GPixel/s. The R8 M445DX leads by about 43% in this metric.

Q: What memory configurations do these two GPUs use?

A: The R7 M260X uses 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The R8 M445DX uses system-shared memory, with its type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system-dependent.

Q: Are there any identical specifications between the two?

A: Yes, both GPUs have 8 ROPs, use a 28 nm process node from TSMC, support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170, and have portable-device-dependent display outputs. Both are also end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next architecture. The R7 M260X is built on GCN 1.0, using the Opal chip, while the R8 M445DX uses GCN 3.0 with the Meso chip. This architectural gap explains several performance-related differences beyond just clock speeds.

The R7 M260X is part of the Gem System (R7 M200) generation, while the R8 M445DX belongs to the Gem System Hybrid (Rx M400) family. The R8 M445DX is explicitly labeled as a hybrid part, which aligns with its system-shared memory design. The R7 M260X, by contrast, has dedicated GDDR5 memory.

The transistor counts differ significantly. The R7 M260X packs 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, while the R8 M445DX contains 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die. Transistor density is nearly identical: 12.3 million per mm² for the R7 M260X versus 12.4 million per mm² for the R8 M445DX. The larger chip on the R8 M445DX provides more headroom for its higher clock speeds.

Shading unit counts also differ. The R7 M260X has 384 shading units and 24 texture mapping units, while the R8 M445DX has 320 shading units and 20 TMUs. Despite having fewer execution units, the R8 M445DX achieves higher throughput due to its clock advantage.

The R8 M445DX includes FP16 support at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning it can process half-precision data at the same rate as full-precision. The R7 M260X has no listed FP16 capability. This makes the R8 M445DX more flexible for workloads that can utilize reduced precision.

DirectX support differs as well, with the R7 M260X limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and the R8 M445DX supporting DirectX 12 (12_0). The newer feature level on the R8 M445DX reflects its more recent architecture.

Where Each One Wins

The R7 M260X wins in the most direct comparison available: the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark. It scores 5690 against 4727 for the R8 M445DX, a 20.4% advantage. This is the only head-to-head benchmark result in the database, and it favors the R7 M260X decisively.

The R7 M260X also has the advantage of dedicated memory. With 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus delivering 64.00 GB/s, it does not depend on system memory performance. The R8 M445DX uses system-shared memory with bandwidth listed as system-dependent, meaning its real-world performance can vary with the host system's memory configuration.

The R8 M445DX wins on theoretical throughput metrics. Its 653.4 GFLOPS FP32 compute is higher than the R7 M260X's 549.1 GFLOPS. It also leads in texture rate, at 20.42 GTexel/s versus 17.16 GTexel/s, and in pixel rate, at 8.168 GPixel/s versus 5.720 GPixel/s.

The R8 M445DX also has a higher boost clock: 1021 MHz versus 715 MHz on the R7 M260X. Its base clock of 780 MHz also exceeds the R7 M260X's base of 620 MHz. For applications that scale well with raw clock speed, the R8 M445DX has the edge.

The R8 M445DX's DirectX 12 (12_0) support gives it a feature-level advantage for games and applications that use the latest DirectX 12 features. The R7 M260X is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1), which may restrict access to certain rendering techniques.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: Opal (R7 M260X) versus Meso (R8 M445DX)
• Architecture: GCN 1.0 versus GCN 3.0
• Generation: Gem System (R7 M200) versus Gem System Hybrid (Rx M400)
• Transistors: 950 million versus 1,550 million
• Die size: 77 mm² versus 125 mm²
• Base clock: 620 MHz versus 780 MHz
• Boost clock: 715 MHz versus 1021 MHz
• Memory clock: 1000 MHz / 4 Gbps effective versus system shared
• Memory size: 1024 MB versus system shared
• Memory type: GDDR5 versus system shared
• Memory bus width: 128 bit versus system shared
• Memory bandwidth: 64.00 GB/s versus system dependent
• Shading units: 384 versus 320
• TMUs: 24 versus 20
• Pixel rate: 5.720 GPixel/s versus 8.168 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 17.16 GTexel/s versus 20.42 GTexel/s
• FP32 performance: 549.1 GFLOPS versus 653.4 GFLOPS
• FP16 performance: not listed versus 653.4 GFLOPS (1:1)
• DirectX support: 12 (11_1) versus 12 (12_0)
• Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x8 versus IGP
• Slot width: not listed versus IGP
• Power connectors: None versus not listed
• Release date: 2015-12-05 versus 2016-05-14
• Predecessor: Solar System versus not listed
• Successor: Polaris Mobile versus not listed

Both GPUs share the same 28 nm process, TSMC as foundry, 8 ROPs, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.170, portable-device-dependent display outputs, and end-of-life production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct benchmark comparison between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the R7 M260X scores 5690, while the R8 M445DX scores 4727. The R7 M260X wins by 963 points, a 20.4% margin. This is a substantial performance gap in compute workloads.

The R7 M260X also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 4631, though no comparable Vulkan result exists for the R8 M445DX in the database. This additional data point suggests the R7 M260X has been tested across more APIs.

Looking at the R7 M260X's nearest rivals provides context for its OpenCL score. The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M averages 5154, just 0.1% behind. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M averages 5211, which is 1% ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M averages 5236, 1.4% ahead. The AMD Radeon R7 240 averages 5063, 1.9% behind. This places the R7 M260X in a tight competitive cluster.

The R8 M445DX's nearest rivals tell a similar story. The AMD Radeon R5 M335 averages 4752, 0.5% ahead. The NVIDIA Quadro P400 averages 4684, 0.9% behind. The AMD Radeon R5 M255 averages 4788, 1.3% ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB averages 4791, also 1.3% ahead. The R8 M445DX sits at the lower end of its comparison group.

The theoretical specifications tell a different story than the benchmark. The R8 M445DX has higher pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 compute, yet it loses decisively in the OpenCL benchmark. This suggests the R7 M260X's dedicated memory subsystem provides a real-world advantage that raw compute rates do not capture.

The R7 M260X's 64.00 GB/s of dedicated bandwidth likely helps in OpenCL workloads that stress memory access patterns. The R8 M445DX's system-shared memory, with bandwidth dependent on the host platform, cannot guarantee comparable memory performance.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the AMD Radeon R7 M260X. It wins the only direct comparison available, scoring 20.4% higher in Geekbench OpenCL. Its average benchmark score of 5161 is 434 points higher than the R8 M445DX's 4727. The R7 M260X also holds a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs: 30th versus 27th.

Users who prioritize compute performance in OpenCL applications should select the R7 M260X. Its dedicated 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent memory performance that does not depend on the host system. The R8 M445DX's system-shared memory introduces variability that the data shows leads to lower benchmark outcomes.

The R8 M445DX does have theoretical advantages that should not be ignored. Its higher pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 compute indicate it can process certain workloads faster when memory bandwidth is not the limiting factor. Its DirectX 12 (12_0) support is also more current than the R7 M260X's DirectX 12 (11_1).

However, the benchmark result is the most reliable indicator of real-world performance, and it favors the R7 M260X by a wide margin. The R8 M445DX's higher clock speeds and compute rates did not translate into a higher OpenCL score.

The R7 M260X is the better choice for users who need proven compute performance, especially in OpenCL-heavy workloads. The R8 M445DX may be preferable for users who value its newer architecture, DirectX 12 (12_0) feature set, and FP16 support, but they should expect lower benchmark scores.

For a hybrid part with system-shared memory, the R8 M445DX's performance is inherently tied to the host system's memory configuration. The R7 M260X's dedicated memory makes it a more predictable performer. Based on the recorded data, the R7 M260X is the stronger GPU overall, with a 20.4% lead in the head-to-head benchmark and a higher average score across all tests.