GRID M10-4Q vs Radeon R9 260

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

GRID M10-4Q vs Radeon R9 260 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GRID M10-4Q vs Radeon R9 260: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GRID M10-4Q

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 225W instead of 275W, a 50W reduction.
✅More future proof: Maxwell (2014−2017) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌2016 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
1918% HIGHER MSRP
$2,805 MSRPvs$139 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 1.1 vs 21.9 G3D/$ ($2,805 MSRP vs $139 MSRP).

Radeon R9 260

2013

Why buy it

✅Costs $2,666 less on MSRP ($139 MSRP vs $2,805 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1966.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 21.9 vs 1.1 G3D/$ ($139 MSRP vs $2,805 MSRP).
✅GRID M10-4Q is already obsolete for modern gaming, so Radeon R9 260 is the less risky modern option long term.

Trade-offs

❌2013 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌22.2% higher power demand at 275W vs 225W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Radeon R9 260 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 2.4% in PassMark G3D (3,048 vs 2,977), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Radeon R9 260 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: the newer upscaling stack, FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack. That still leaves it as the safer long-term option on hardware alone.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon R9 260 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $2,666 cheaper on MSRP at $139 vs $2,805, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 1966.1% (21.9 vs 1.1), so the value case lines up with the gaming result.

GRID M10-4Q vs Radeon R9 260 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GRID M10-4Q

The GRID M10-4Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 18 2016. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1033 MHz to 1306 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,977 points.

Radeon R9 260

The Radeon R9 260 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 5 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 947 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 275W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,048 points. Launch price was $399.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GRID M10-4Q scores 2,977 and the Radeon R9 260 reaches 3,048 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID M10-4Q is built on Maxwell while the Radeon R9 260 uses GCN 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 640 (GRID M10-4Q) vs 2,560 (Radeon R9 260). Raw compute: 1.672 TFLOPS (GRID M10-4Q) vs 4.849 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 260).

Feature	GRID M10-4Q	Radeon R9 260
G3D Mark Score	2,977	3,048+2%
Architecture	Maxwell	GCN 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	640	2560+300%
Compute (TFLOPS)	1.672 TFLOPS	4.849 TFLOPS+190%
ROPs	16	64+300%
TMUs	40	160+300%
L1 Cache	320 KB	640 KB+100%
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GRID M10-4Q	Radeon R9 260
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards ship with 2 GB of GDDR5. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the GRID M10-4Q and 128-bit on the Radeon R9 260. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID M10-4Q) vs 1 MB (Radeon R9 260) — the GRID M10-4Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GRID M10-4Q	Radeon R9 260
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GRID M10-4Q draws 225W versus the Radeon R9 260's 275W — a 20% difference. The GRID M10-4Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID M10-4Q) vs 450W (Radeon R9 260). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin.

Feature	GRID M10-4Q	Radeon R9 260
TDP	225W-18%	275W
Recommended PSU	350W-22%	450W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	1x 6-pin
Perf/Watt	13.2+19%	11.1

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GRID M10-4Q came in at $2805, while the Radeon R9 260 launched at $139. On MSRP, Radeon R9 260 was 95% cheaper ($2666 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 1.1 (GRID M10-4Q) vs 21.9 (Radeon R9 260) — the Radeon R9 260 offers 1890.9% better value. The newer card here is GRID M10-4Q (2016 vs 2013).

Feature	GRID M10-4Q	Radeon R9 260
MSRP	$2805	$139-95%
Performance per Dollar	1.1	21.9+1891%
Codename	GM107	Hawaii
Release	May 18 2016	November 5 2013
Ranking	#622	#316

Search GRID M10-4Q on Amazon

Search Radeon R9 260 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.