
GRID P4-2Q
Popular choices:

Radeon R7 260X
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The GRID P4-2Q is positioned at rank #285 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID P4-2Q
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R7 260X is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GRID P4-2Q.
| Insight | GRID P4-2Q | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R7 260X offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R7 260X holds the technical lead. Priced at $150 (vs $235), it costs 36% less, resulting in a 58.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID P4-2Q | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+58.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($235) | ✅More affordable ($150) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GRID P4-2Q and Radeon R7 260X

GRID P4-2Q
The GRID P4-2Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 557 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,162 points.

Radeon R7 260X
The Radeon R7 260X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 8 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 115W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,198 points. Launch price was $139.
Graphics Performance
The GRID P4-2Q scores 3,162 and the Radeon R7 260X reaches 3,198 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID P4-2Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Radeon R7 260X uses GCN 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID P4-2Q) vs 896 (Radeon R7 260X). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID P4-2Q) vs 1.971 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 260X). Boost clocks: 1178 MHz vs 1000 MHz.
| Feature | GRID P4-2Q | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,162 | 3,198+1% |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+129% | 896 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.825 TFLOPS+145% | 1.971 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz+18% | 1000 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+300% | 16 |
| TMUs | 128+129% | 56 |
| L1 Cache | 768 KB+243% | 224 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+700% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID P4-2Q | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID P4-2Q) vs 0.25 MB (Radeon R7 260X) — the GRID P4-2Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID P4-2Q | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+700% | 0.25 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID P4-2Q draws 225W versus the Radeon R7 260X's 115W — a 64.7% difference. The Radeon R7 260X is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID P4-2Q) vs 500W (Radeon R7 260X). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin.
| Feature | GRID P4-2Q | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 115W-49% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-30% | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | — | 170mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | — | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 14.1 | 27.8+97% |
Value Analysis
The GRID P4-2Q launched at $1500 MSRP and currently averages $235, while the Radeon R7 260X launched at $139 and now averages $150. The Radeon R7 260X costs 36.2% less ($85 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 13.5 (GRID P4-2Q) vs 21.3 (Radeon R7 260X) — the Radeon R7 260X offers 57.8% better value. The GRID P4-2Q is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2013).
| Feature | GRID P4-2Q | Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1500 | $139-91% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $235 | $150-36% |
| Performance per Dollar | 13.5 | 21.3+58% |
| Codename | GM204 | Bonaire |
| Release | August 30 2015 | October 8 2013 |
| Ranking | #433 | #568 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















