by Rob Williams on February 17, 2014 in Graphics & Displays
Both AMD and NVIDIA are in the midst of launching new budget GPUs, but neither of them affect the position of the Radeon R7 260X – a great thing as I have Sapphire’s take on the model to tackle. With a boost of 50MHz to the core clock, and an improved cooler, should Sapphire’s R7 260X OC be on your sub-$150 shortlist?
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.
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.
Given its synthetic nature, it’s of little surprise to see Sapphire’s card come out at just above the reference R7 260X given its minor clock boost.
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.
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.
Wrapping things up, Sapphire’s card manages an extra 1 FPS over the reference card. Nothing too earth-shattering here.