Radeon Pro WX 4170 vs Radeon R7 260
Radeon Pro WX 4170
Popular choices:
Radeon R7 260
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 Radeon Pro WX 4170 is positioned at rank #167 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 Radeon Pro WX 4170
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R7 260 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.8% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Radeon Pro WX 4170 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Radeon Pro WX 4170 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R7 260 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R7 260 holds the technical lead. Priced at $110 (vs $120), it costs 8% less, resulting in a 9.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon Pro WX 4170 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+9.9%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($120) | ✅More affordable ($110) |
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 Pro WX 4170 and Radeon R7 260
Radeon Pro WX 4170
The Radeon Pro WX 4170 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 10 2016. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1125 MHz to 1201 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,870 points. Launch price was $399.
Radeon R7 260
The Radeon R7 260 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 17 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1100 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 95W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,892 points. Launch price was $109.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon Pro WX 4170 scores 2,870 and the Radeon R7 260 reaches 2,892 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon Pro WX 4170 is built on GCN 4.0 while the Radeon R7 260 uses GCN 2.0, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (Radeon Pro WX 4170) vs 768 (Radeon R7 260). Raw compute: 2.46 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro WX 4170) vs 1.536 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 260). Boost clocks: 1201 MHz vs 1100 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 4170 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,870 | 2,892 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1024+33% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.46 TFLOPS+60% | 1.536 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1201 MHz+9% | 1100 MHz |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 64+33% | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB+33% | 192 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 4170 | Radeon R7 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)
The Radeon Pro WX 4170 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R7 260 has 1 GB. The Radeon Pro WX 4170 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Radeon Pro WX 4170) vs 0.25 MB (Radeon R7 260) — the Radeon Pro WX 4170 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 4170 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+300% | 1 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 0.25 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_0) (Radeon Pro WX 4170) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon R7 260). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 4170 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.3+8% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4+33% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 3.4 (Polaris) (Radeon Pro WX 4170) vs VCE 2.0 (Radeon R7 260). Decoder: UVD 6.3 vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Decode Only),AV1 (Decode Only) (Radeon Pro WX 4170) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MVC (Radeon R7 260).
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 4170 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 3.4 (Polaris) | VCE 2.0 |
| Decoder | UVD 6.3 | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Decode Only),AV1 (Decode Only) | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MVC |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon Pro WX 4170 draws 50W versus the Radeon R7 260's 95W — a 62.1% difference. The Radeon Pro WX 4170 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon Pro WX 4170) vs 400W (Radeon R7 260). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80.
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 4170 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-47% | 95W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-13% | 400W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | — | 170mm |
| Height | — | 112mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 57.4+89% | 30.4 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon Pro WX 4170 launched at $400 MSRP and currently averages $120, while the Radeon R7 260 launched at $109 and now averages $110. The Radeon R7 260 costs 8.3% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 23.9 (Radeon Pro WX 4170) vs 26.3 (Radeon R7 260) — the Radeon R7 260 offers 10% better value. The Radeon Pro WX 4170 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2013).
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 4170 | Radeon R7 260 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $400 | $109-73% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $120 | $110-8% |
| Performance per Dollar | 23.9 | 26.3+10% |
| Codename | Baffin | Bonaire |
| Release | November 10 2016 | December 17 2013 |
| Ranking | #526 | #591 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon Pro WX 4170 and Radeon R7 260
