Quadro FX 5600 vs Radeon R7 M260

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.

Quadro FX 5600 vs Radeon R7 M260 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.

Quadro FX 5600 vs Radeon R7 M260: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Quadro FX 5600

2008

Why buy it

✅49.0% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.

Trade-offs

❌2008 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
2626.4% HIGHER MSRP
$2,999 MSRPvs$110 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.2 vs 4.8 G3D/$ ($2,999 MSRP vs $110 MSRP).
❌152% higher power demand at 189W vs 75W.

Radeon R7 M260

2015

Why buy it

✅Costs $2,889 less on MSRP ($110 MSRP vs $2,999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 2636.7% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 4.8 vs 0.2 G3D/$ ($110 MSRP vs $2,999 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 189W, a 114W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro FX 5600 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌2015 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Quadro FX 5600 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 49.0% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. PassMark G3D leans toward Radeon R7 M260 instead at 527 vs 525, so for this question the real-game FPS result matters more than the synthetic split.

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

Quadro FX 5600 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond because it comes out ahead on the available hardware-headroom signals for this matchup.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon R7 M260 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $2,889 cheaper on MSRP at $110 vs $2,999, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 2636.7% (4.8 vs 0.2), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, Radeon R7 M260 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, Quadro FX 5600 has the stronger long-term case.

Quadro FX 5600 vs Radeon R7 M260 Technical Specifications

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

Quadro FX 5600

The Quadro FX 5600 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 610 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 189W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 525 points. Launch price was $3,499.

Radeon R7 M260

The Radeon R7 M260 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 6 2015. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 620 MHz to 715 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 527 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro FX 5600 scores 525 and the Radeon R7 M260 reaches 527 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 5600 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Radeon R7 M260 uses GCN 1.0, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 5600) vs 384 (Radeon R7 M260). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 5600) vs 0.5491 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 M260).

Feature	Quadro FX 5600	Radeon R7 M260
G3D Mark Score	525	527
Architecture	Tesla 2.0	GCN 1.0
Process Node	55 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	240	384+60%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.6221 TFLOPS+13%	0.5491 TFLOPS
ROPs	32+300%	8
TMUs	80+233%	24
L2 Cache	256 KB	256 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro FX 5600	Radeon R7 M260
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 4 GB of GDDR5. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the Quadro FX 5600 and 128-bit on the Radeon R7 M260.

Feature	Quadro FX 5600	Radeon R7 M260
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	256 KB	256 KB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro FX 5600 draws 189W versus the Radeon R7 M260's 75W — a 86.4% difference. The Radeon R7 M260 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 5600) vs 350W (Radeon R7 M260). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Mobile.

Feature	Quadro FX 5600	Radeon R7 M260
TDP	189W	75W-60%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Mobile
Slots	—	0
Temp (Load)	—	75°C
Perf/Watt	2.8	7.0+150%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Quadro FX 5600 came in at $2999, while the Radeon R7 M260 launched at $110. On MSRP, Radeon R7 M260 was 96.3% cheaper ($2889 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 0.2 (Quadro FX 5600) vs 4.8 (Radeon R7 M260) — the Radeon R7 M260 offers 2300% better value. The newer card here is Radeon R7 M260 (2015 vs 2008).

Feature	Quadro FX 5600	Radeon R7 M260
MSRP	$2999	$110-96%
Performance per Dollar	0.2	4.8+2300%
Codename	GT200B	Opal
Release	November 11 2008	December 6 2015
Ranking	#815	#878

Search Quadro FX 5600 on Amazon

Search Radeon R7 M260 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.