NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M vs AMD Radeon R7 260

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M and AMD Radeon R7 260 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: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 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), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M

AMD Radeon R7 260

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M

Videocard is newer: launch date 9 month(s) later
Around 73% higher texture fill rate: 83.04 GTexel / s vs 48 GTexel / s
Around 67% higher pipelines: 1280 vs 768
Around 73% better floating-point performance: 2,657 gflops vs 1,536 gflops
Around 42% lower typical power consumption: 81 Watt vs 115 Watt
3x more maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 2 GB
Around 54% higher memory clock speed: 2500 MHz vs 1625 MHz
Around 97% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5691 vs 2892
2.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 59.428 vs 26.189
Around 40% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1113.788 vs 798.239

Specifications (specs)
Launch date	7 October 2014 vs 17 December 2013
Texture fill rate	83.04 GTexel / s vs 48 GTexel / s
Pipelines	1280 vs 768
Floating-point performance	2,657 gflops vs 1,536 gflops
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	81 Watt vs 115 Watt
Maximum memory size	6 GB vs 2 GB
Memory clock speed	2500 MHz vs 1625 MHz
Benchmarks
PassMark - G3D Mark	5691 vs 2892
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	59.428 vs 26.189
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1113.788 vs 798.239

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 260

Around 6% higher boost clock speed: 1100 MHz vs 1038 MHz
Around 48% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 559 vs 378
Around 2% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.223 vs 4.157
Around 16% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 45.294 vs 39.101
2.9x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 240.395 vs 81.909

Specifications (specs)
Boost clock speed	1100 MHz vs 1038 MHz
Benchmarks
PassMark - G2D Mark	559 vs 378
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	4.223 vs 4.157
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	45.294 vs 39.101
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	240.395 vs 81.909

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 260

PassMark - G3D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

5691

2892

PassMark - G2D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

378

559

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

59.428

26.189

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

1113.788

798.239

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

4.157

4.223

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

39.101

45.294

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

81.909

240.395

Name	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M	AMD Radeon R7 260
PassMark - G3D Mark	5691	2892
PassMark - G2D Mark	378	559
Geekbench - OpenCL	19001
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	59.428	26.189
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1113.788	798.239
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	4.157	4.223
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	39.101	45.294
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	81.909	240.395
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	8546
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	3699
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	3342
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	8546
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	3699
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	3342
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	472

Compare specifications (specs)

	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M	AMD Radeon R7 260
Essentials
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0	GCN 2.0
Code name	GM204	Bonaire
Launch date	7 October 2014	17 December 2013
Launch price (MSRP)	$2,560.89	$109
Place in performance rating	568	570
Price now	$1,899	$89.99
Type	Laptop	Desktop
Value for money (0-100)	3.99	44.11
Design		AMD Radeon R7 200 Series
Technical info
Boost clock speed	1038 MHz	1100 MHz
Core clock speed	924 MHz
CUDA cores	1280
Floating-point performance	2,657 gflops	1,536 gflops
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	28 nm
Pipelines	1280	768
Texture fill rate	83.04 GTexel / s	48 GTexel / s
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	81 Watt	115 Watt
Transistor count	5,200 million	2,080 million
Stream Processors		896
Video outputs and ports
Display Connectors	No outputs	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	1
G-SYNC support
HDMI
VGA аnalog display support	1
DisplayPort support
Dual-link DVI support
Eyefinity
VGA
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x16
Laptop size	large
SLI options	1
Supplementary power connectors	None	1 x 6-pin
Length		170 mm
API support
DirectX	12.0 (12_1)	12
OpenCL	1.1
OpenGL	4.5	4.5
Memory
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	2 GB
Memory bandwidth	120 GB / s	104 GB/s
Memory bus width	192 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2500 MHz	1625 MHz
Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Shared memory	0
Technologies
Ansel
BatteryBoost
CUDA
DSR
GameStream
GameWorks
GeForce Experience
GeForce ShadowPlay
GPU Boost
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder
Optimus
SLI
AMD Eyefinity
DDMA audio
FreeSync