Latest News Posts

Social
Latest Forum Posts

The $109 Console-killer GPU: AMD’s Radeon R7 260 Graphics Card Reviewed
Bookmark and Share

AMD Radeon R7 260
Print
by Rob Williams on December 23, 2013 in AMD-Based GPU

No one should be surprised at the fact that testing out $500 graphics cards is fun, but with the right perspective, budget cards can be, too. Take the $109 AMD Radeon R7 260, for example, which has debuted following flagship console releases. With that in mind, let’s see what such an affordable GPU can pull off at the much-loved 1080p resolution.

Synthetic Tests: Futuremark 3DMark, 3DMark 11, Unigine Heaven 4.0

We don’t make it a point to seek out automated gaming benchmarks, but we do like to get a couple in that anyone reading this can run themselves. Of these, Futuremark’s name leads the pack, as its benchmarks have become synonymous with the activity. Plus, it does help that the company’s benchmarks stress PCs to their limit – and beyond.

3DMark

While Futuremark’s latest GPU test suite is 3DMark, I’m also including results from 3DMark 11 as it’s still a common choice among benchmarkers.

AMD Radeon R9 260 - Futuremark 3DMark

AMD Radeon R9 260 - Futuremark 3DMark 11 - Performance

AMD Radeon R9 260 - Futuremark 3DMark 11 - Extreme

Both 3DMark’s back up the performance deltas between these two cards quite well when compared to what we saw with our real-world testing.

Unigine Heaven 4.0

Unigine might not have as established a name as Futuremark, but its products are nothing short of “awesome”. The company’s main focus is its game engine, but a by-product of that is its benchmarks, which are used to both give benchmarkers another great tool to take advantage of, and also to show-off what its engine is capable of. It’s a win-win all-around.

Unigine Heaven 4.0

The biggest reason that the company’s “Heaven” benchmark is so relied-upon by benchmarkers is that both AMD and NVIDIA promote it for its heavy use of tessellation. Like 3DMark, the benchmark here is overkill by design, so results are not going to directly correlate with real gameplay. Rather, they showcase which card models can better handle both DX11 and its GPU-bogging features.

AMD Radeon R9 260 - Unigine Heaven 4.0 (1920x1080)

A graph like this makes the R7 260 look all the more attractive – the price difference is $30, after all.


  • http://www.youtube.com/user/no6969el Noel Barcellos

    Not sure if the 260 has support for mantle like you suggested at the end of your article. Other than that great set of information, I think I might just get one for my lady.

    • http://techgage.com/ Rob Williams

      Here’s a slide out of the press deck showing support for Mantle on this GPU. It’s a smart move by AMD… it’s frustrating when companies lob off technologies like these on lower-end parts.

    • RainMotorsports

      GCN is 7730 on up and not sure what GCN version Mantle “requires” 7770 is 1.0 7790 is 1.1. But the R7 240 and above should support mantle if I am not mistaken.

  • christianh

    As I say on every review site… Why test this level card with such a high-priced CPU…?

    It will still be GPU limited with an i5 or Richland…

    • http://techgage.com/ Rob Williams

      The other option would be using a modest CPU and risking the introduction of some bottleneck. That’s not the point here. The PC itself is kept 100% identical; all that changes is the GPU. Which is important, because that’s the focus.

    • RainMotorsports

      In GPU testing nothing but the GPU and driver should ever change. If he swaps the CPU out the results should be considered invalid no matter what any other data says otherwise. Its not very scientific to change static variables.