AMD Radeon R7 M260DX vs AMD Radeon R7 240
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R7 M260DX and AMD Radeon R7 240 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 M260DX
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 0 month(s) later
- Around 21% higher boost clock speed: 940 MHz vs 780 MHz
- 3.4x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 18010 vs 5239
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 12 October 2014 vs 8 October 2013 |
Boost clock speed | 940 MHz vs 780 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 18010 vs 5239 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 240
- Around 61% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1688 vs 1047
- Around 61% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1688 vs 1047
- 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2342 vs 1019
- 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2342 vs 1019
- Around 55% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 vs 2165
- Around 55% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 vs 2165
- Around 38% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 270 vs 195
- Around 10% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 897 vs 817
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1688 vs 1047 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1688 vs 1047 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2342 vs 1019 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2342 vs 1019 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 vs 2165 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 vs 2165 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 270 vs 195 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 897 vs 817 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 M260DX
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 240
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon R7 M260DX | AMD Radeon R7 240 |
---|---|---|
Geekbench - OpenCL | 18010 | 5239 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1047 | 1688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1047 | 1688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1019 | 2342 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1019 | 2342 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2165 | 3353 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2165 | 3353 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 195 | 270 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 817 | 897 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 13.344 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 290.632 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.262 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.59 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 60.326 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon R7 M260DX | AMD Radeon R7 240 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | Topaz | Oland |
Launch date | 12 October 2014 | 8 October 2013 |
Place in performance rating | 1255 | 1256 |
Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Design | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
Launch price (MSRP) | $69 | |
Price now | $49.99 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 24.92 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 940 MHz | 780 MHz |
Core clock speed | 925 MHz | |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Transistor count | 3,100 million | 1,040 million |
Floating-point performance | 499.2 gflops | |
Pipelines | 320 | |
Stream Processors | 320 | |
Texture fill rate | 15.6 GTexel / s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
Length | 168 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | N / A | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 72 GB/s | |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
Memory clock speed | 1150 MHz | |
Memory type | DDR3 | |
Technologies |
||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync |