Radeon R7 260X vs Quadro M1200
Radeon R7 260X
Popular choices:
Quadro M1200
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. 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
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro M1200 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.4% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R7 260X.
| Insight | Radeon R7 260X | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro M1200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro M1200 holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $150), it costs 73% less, resulting in a 276.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R7 260X | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+276.6%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) | ✅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 R7 260X and Quadro M1200
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.
Quadro M1200
The Quadro M1200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 11 2017. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1093 MHz to 1150 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 45W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,212 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R7 260X scores 3,198 and the Quadro M1200 reaches 3,212 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R7 260X is built on GCN 2.0 while the Quadro M1200 uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 896 (Radeon R7 260X) vs 640 (Quadro M1200). Raw compute: 1.971 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 260X) vs 1.399 TFLOPS (Quadro M1200). Boost clocks: 1000 MHz vs 1150 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon R7 260X | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,198 | 3,212 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 896+40% | 640 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.971 TFLOPS+41% | 1.399 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1000 MHz | 1150 MHz+15% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 56+40% | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 224 KB | 320 KB+43% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R7 260X | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon R7 260X comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M1200 has 4 GB. The Quadro M1200 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Radeon R7 260X) vs 2 MB (Quadro M1200) — the Quadro M1200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R7 260X | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_0) (Radeon R7 260X) vs 12 (11_0) (Quadro M1200). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon R7 260X | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.2+9% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 6+50% | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (Radeon R7 260X) vs 3rd Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M1200). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs PureVideo HD VP6. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (Radeon R7 260X) vs H.264,HEVC,VP8 (Quadro M1200).
| Feature | Radeon R7 260X | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 2.0 | 3rd Gen NVENC (Maxwell) |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | PureVideo HD VP6 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | H.264,HEVC,VP8 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R7 260X draws 115W versus the Quadro M1200's 45W — a 87.5% difference. The Quadro M1200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Radeon R7 260X) vs 350W (Quadro M1200). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 82°C.
| Feature | Radeon R7 260X | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 115W | 45W-61% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 350W-30% |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 170mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 80-2% | 82°C |
| Perf/Watt | 27.8 | 71.4+157% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R7 260X launched at $139 MSRP and currently averages $150, while the Quadro M1200 launched at $0 and now averages $40. The Quadro M1200 costs 73.3% less ($110 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 21.3 (Radeon R7 260X) vs 80.3 (Quadro M1200) — the Quadro M1200 offers 277% better value. The Quadro M1200 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2013).
| Feature | Radeon R7 260X | Quadro M1200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $139 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150 | $40-73% |
| Performance per Dollar | 21.3 | 80.3+277% |
| Codename | Bonaire | GM107 |
| Release | October 8 2013 | January 11 2017 |
| Ranking | #568 | #567 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R7 260X and Quadro M1200
