Winner
AMD Radeon R7 260X
GPUBoss recommends the AMD Radeon R7 260X based on its compute performance.
See full details Radeon R7 260X vs GeForce GTX 550 Ti |
VS
GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of R7 260X vs 550 Ti among Desktop GPUs
Gaming | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more | |
Graphics | |
| | |
| T-Rex, Manhattan, Cloud Gate Factor, Sky Diver Factor and 1 more | |
Computing | |
| | |
| Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more | |
Performance per Watt | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more | |
Value | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more | |
Noise and Power | |
| | |
| TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more | |
| 5.4 | Overall Score |
| | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?
VS
AMD Radeon R7 260XGPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Significantly higher effective memory clock speed | 6,500 MHz | vs | 4,104 MHz | Around 60% higher effective memory clock speed | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Higher clock speed | 1,100 MHz | vs | 900 MHz | More than 20% higher clock speed | |||
| Better PassMark score | 3,128 | vs | 1,926 | More than 60% better PassMark score | |||
| Much higher battlefield 3 framerate | 40.1 fps | vs | 31.4 fps | Around 30% higher battlefield 3 framerate | |||
| Better floating-point performance | 1,971.2 GFLOPS | vs | 691.2 GFLOPS | More than 2.8x better floating-point performance | |||
| More memory | 2,048 MB | vs | 1,024 MB | 2x more memory | |||
| Higher texture rate | 61.6 GTexel/s | vs | 28.8 GTexel/s | Around 2.2x higher texture rate | |||
| Much higher memory clock speed | 1,625 MHz | vs | 1,026 MHz | Around 60% higher memory clock speed | |||
| More shading units | 896 | vs | 192 | 704 more shading units | |||
| Better fire strike factor score | 33.7 | vs | 17.07 | More than 95% better fire strike factor score | |||
| Better T-Rex score | 3.67 frames/s | vs | 1.06 frames/s | Around 3.5x better T-Rex score | |||
| Higher pixel rate | 17.6 GPixel/s | vs | 7.2 GPixel/s | Around 2.5x higher pixel rate | |||
| More texture mapping units | 56 | vs | 32 | 24 more texture mapping units | |||
| Better PassMark direct compute score | 1,681 | vs | 822 | More than 2x better PassMark direct compute score | |||
| |||||||
| Better 3DMark 11 graphics score | 15,553 | vs | 11,820 | More than 30% better 3DMark 11 graphics score | |||
| Better 3DMark vantage graphics score | 9,923 | vs | 6,931 | Around 45% better 3DMark vantage graphics score | |||
| Higher battlefield 4 framerate | 48 | vs | 8.2 | More than 5.8x higher battlefield 4 framerate | |||
| More render output processors | 24 | vs | 16 | 8 more render output processors | |||
| Wider memory bus | 192 bit | vs | 128 bit | 50% wider memory bus | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon R7 260X vs GeForce GTX 550 Ti
Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench
Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench
Ocean surface simulation Data courtesy CompuBench
T-Rex (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench
Manhattan (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench
Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark
Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark
Battlefield 4
Reviews Word on the street
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $274 | ||
| R7 260X vs 750 Ti | ||
| | VS |  |
| R7 260X vs 750 | ||
| | VS |  |
| R7 260X vs 7770 | ||
| | VS |  |
| R7 260X vs 7850 | ||
 | VS |  |
| 550 Ti vs 650 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $98 | ||
| 550 Ti vs 730 | ||
| | VS | |
| $274 | ||
| 550 Ti vs 750 Ti | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $304 | ||
| 1060 vs 1050 Ti | ||
 | VS | |
| 970 vs 1050 Ti | ||
| | VS | |
| $304 | ||
| 970 vs 1060 | ||
 | VS | |
| 960 vs 1050 Ti | ||
| | VS | |
| 970 vs 960 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $304 | ||
| 1060 vs RX 580 | ||
| | VS |  |
| 970 vs R9 390 | ||
