CPU
GPU
Radeon R7 M260X
Popular choices:
Quadro FX 4800
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. The Radeon R7 M260X is positioned at rank 410 and the Quadro FX 4800 is on rank 379, so the Quadro FX 4800 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R7 M260X
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 4800
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon R7 M260X is significantly newer (2015 vs 2008). The Radeon R7 M260X likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 4800 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R7 M260X is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.8% higher G3D Mark score and 166.7% 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 Quadro FX 4800.
| Insight | Radeon R7 M260X | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.8%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+166.7%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R7 M260X offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R7 M260X holds the technical lead. Priced at $35 (vs $80), it costs 56% less, resulting in a 130.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R7 M260X | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+130.4%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($35) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($80) |
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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R7 M260X and Quadro FX 4800
Radeon R7 M260X
The Radeon R7 M260X 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: 1,013 points.
Quadro FX 4800
The Quadro FX 4800 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,005 points. Launch price was $1,799.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R7 M260X scores 1,013 and the Quadro FX 4800 reaches 1,005 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R7 M260X is built on GCN 1.0 while the Quadro FX 4800 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 384 (Radeon R7 M260X) vs 192 (Quadro FX 4800). Raw compute: 0.5491 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 M260X) vs 0.4623 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 4800).
| Feature | Radeon R7 M260X | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,013 | 1,005 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 384+100% | 192 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.5491 TFLOPS+19% | 0.4623 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 24+200% |
| TMUs | 24 | 64+167% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB+33% | 192 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R7 M260X | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 M260X comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 4800 has 2 GB. The Radeon R7 M260X offers 166.7% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Radeon R7 M260X) vs 192 KB (Quadro FX 4800) — the Radeon R7 M260X has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R7 M260X | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+167% | 1.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB+33% | 192 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R7 M260X draws 75W versus the Quadro FX 4800's 150W — a 66.7% difference. The Radeon R7 M260X is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R7 M260X) vs 350W (Quadro FX 4800). Power connectors: Mobile vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon R7 M260X | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-50% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Mobile | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | — |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 85 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 13.5+101% | 6.7 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R7 M260X launched at $139 MSRP and currently averages $35, while the Quadro FX 4800 launched at $1799 and now averages $80. The Radeon R7 M260X costs 56.3% less ($45 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 28.9 (Radeon R7 M260X) vs 12.6 (Quadro FX 4800) — the Radeon R7 M260X offers 129.4% better value. The Radeon R7 M260X is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2008).
| Feature | Radeon R7 M260X | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $139-92% | $1799 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $35-56% | $80 |
| Performance per Dollar | 28.9+129% | 12.6 |
| Codename | Opal | GT200B |
| Release | December 6 2015 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #878 | #884 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R7 M260X and Quadro FX 4800
