Radeon HD 6990
VS
Radeon R9 260

Radeon HD 6990 vs Radeon R9 260

AMD

Radeon HD 6990

2011Core: 830 MHz
VS
AMD

Radeon R9 260

2013Core: 947 MHz

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. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon R9 260 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 Radeon HD 6990.

InsightRadeon HD 6990Radeon R9 260
Performance
Lower raw frame rates (-1.1%)
Leading raw performance (+1.1%)
Longevity
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 3 (2010−2013))
🛑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
Standard Size (310mm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Radeon R9 260 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R9 260 holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $498), it costs 92% less, resulting in a 1159% higher cost efficiency score.

InsightRadeon HD 6990Radeon R9 260
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Better overall value (+1159%)
Upfront Cost
⚠️Higher upfront cost ($498)
More affordable ($40)

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 Radeon HD 6990 and Radeon R9 260

AMD

Radeon HD 6990

The Radeon HD 6990 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 8 2011. It features the TeraScale 3 architecture. The core clock speed is 830 MHz. It has 1536 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 375W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,014 points. Launch price was $699.

AMD

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 Radeon HD 6990 scores 3,014 and the Radeon R9 260 reaches 3,048 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 6990 is built on TeraScale 3 while the Radeon R9 260 uses GCN 2.0, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (Radeon HD 6990) vs 2,560 (Radeon R9 260). Raw compute: 2.55 TFLOPS ×2 (Radeon HD 6990) vs 4.849 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 260).

FeatureRadeon HD 6990Radeon R9 260
G3D Mark Score
3,014
3,048+1%
Architecture
TeraScale 3
GCN 2.0
Process Node
40 nm
28 nm
Shading Units
1536 ×2
2560+67%
Compute (TFLOPS)
2.55 TFLOPS ×2
4.849 TFLOPS+90%
ROPs
32 ×2
64+100%
TMUs
96 ×2
160+67%
L1 Cache
384 KB
640 KB+67%
L2 Cache
0.5 MB
1 MB+100%

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureRadeon HD 6990Radeon R9 260
Upscaling Tech
FSR 1.0 (Software)
FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation
Not Supported
Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction
No
No
Low Latency
AMD Anti-Lag
AMD Anti-Lag
💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (Radeon HD 6990) vs 1 MB (Radeon R9 260) — the Radeon R9 260 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureRadeon HD 6990Radeon R9 260
VRAM Capacity
2 GB
2 GB
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth
Unknown
Unknown
Bus Width
128-bit
128-bit
L2 Cache
0.5 MB
1 MB+100%
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon HD 6990 draws 375W versus the Radeon R9 260's 275W — a 30.8% difference. The Radeon R9 260 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 750W (Radeon HD 6990) vs 450W (Radeon R9 260). Power connectors: 2x 8-pin vs 1x 6-pin.

FeatureRadeon HD 6990Radeon R9 260
TDP
375W
275W-27%
Recommended PSU
750W
450W-40%
Power Connector
2x 8-pin
1x 6-pin
Length
310mm
Height
115mm
Slots
2
Temp (Load)
85
Perf/Watt
8.0
11.1+39%
💰

Value Analysis

The Radeon HD 6990 launched at $699 MSRP and currently averages $498, while the Radeon R9 260 launched at $139 and now averages $40. The Radeon R9 260 costs 92% less ($458 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 6.1 (Radeon HD 6990) vs 76.2 (Radeon R9 260) — the Radeon R9 260 offers 1149.2% better value. The Radeon R9 260 is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2011).

FeatureRadeon HD 6990Radeon R9 260
MSRP
$699
$139-80%
Avg Price (30d)
$498
$40-92%
Performance per Dollar
6.1
76.2+1149%
Codename
Antilles
Hawaii
Release
March 8 2011
November 5 2013
Ranking
#583
#316