2.5
Check Prices $278.00
5.6
Check Prices $999.99
Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Radeon R7 260X Crossfire GeForce GTX 690
Cyberpunk 2077 66% 5%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 52% 4%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 47% 7%
FIFA 21 16% 47%
Watch Dogs Legion 60% 1%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 47% 7%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 138% 50%
Grand Theft Auto VI 134% 47%
Godfall 170% 70%
Genshin Impact 66% 5%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 are significantly better than the AMD Radeon R7 260X Crossfire.

The R7 260X has a 185 MHz higher core clock speed than the GeForce GTX 690, but the GeForce GTX 690 has 144 more Texture Mapping Units than the R7 260X. As a result, the GeForce GTX 690 exhibits a 111 GTexel/s better Texture Fill Rate than the R7 260X. This still holds weight but shader performance is generally more relevant, particularly since both of these GPUs support at least DirectX 10.

The R7 260X has a 185 MHz higher core clock speed than the GeForce GTX 690, but the GeForce GTX 690 has 32 more Render Output Units than the R7 260X. As a result, the GeForce GTX 690 exhibits a 23.4 GPixel/s better Pixel Fill Rate than the R7 260X. However, both GPUs support DirectX 9 or above, and pixeling performance is only really relevant when comparing older cards.

The R7 260X was released over a year more recently than the GeForce GTX 690, and so the R7 260X is likely to have better driver support, meaning it will be more optimized for running the latest games when compared to the GeForce GTX 690.

Both GPUs exhibit very powerful performance, so it probably isn't worth upgrading from one to the other, as both are capable of running even the most demanding games at the highest settings.

The Radeon R7 260X Crossfire and the GeForce GTX 690 have the same amount of video memory, but are likely to provide slightly different experiences when displaying game textures at high resolutions.

The GeForce GTX 690 has 176 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the R7 260X, which means that the memory performance of the GeForce GTX 690 is massively better than the R7 260X.

The Radeon R7 260X Crossfire has 1792 Shader Processing Units and the GeForce GTX 690 has 3072. However, the actual shader performance of the R7 260X is 1676 and the actual shader performance of the GeForce GTX 690 is 3130. The GeForce GTX 690 having 1454 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the GeForce GTX 690 delivers a massively smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the R7 260X.

The Radeon R7 260X Crossfire requires 230 Watts to run and the GeForce GTX 690 requires 300 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 600 Watts for the R7 260X and a PSU with at least 650 Watts for the GeForce GTX 690. The GeForce GTX 690 requires 70 Watts more than the R7 260X to run. The difference is significant enough that the GeForce GTX 690 may have an adverse affect on your yearly electricity bills in comparison to the R7 260X.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed1100 MHzvs915 MHz
Boost Clock-vs1019 MHz
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 Bonaire XTX (x2)Kepler GK104-355-A2
OC Potential Fair vs Fair
Driver Support Great vs Good
Release Date01 Oct 2013vs03 May 2012
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

Resolution Performance

1366x768
10
green tick vs green tick
10
1600x900
10
green tick vs green tick
10
1920x1080
8.3
vs green tick
10
2560x1440
6.1
vs green tick
7.8
3840x2160
4.6
vs green tick
5.7

GPU Memory

Memory4096 MBvs4096 MB
Memory Speed1625 MHzvs1500 MHz
Memory Bus256 Bitvs512 Bit
Memory TypeGDDR5vsGDDR5
Memory Bandwidth208GB/secvs384GB/sec
L2 Cache 1024 KB green tick vs green tick 1024 KB
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units1792vs3072
Actual Shader Performance81%vs100%
Technology28nmvs28nm
Texture Mapping Units112vs256
Texture Rate123.2 GTexel/svs234.2 GTexel/s
Render Output Units32vs64
Pixel Rate35.2 GPixel/svs58.6 GPixel/s
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)2560x1600vs4096x2160
VGA Connections0vs0
DVI Connections2vs3
HDMI Connections1vs0
DisplayPort Connections0vs1
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power230 Wattsvs300 Watts
Recommended PSU600 Watts & 42 Ampsvs650 Watts & 38 Amps

GPU Features

DirectX12.0vs12.0
Shader Model5.0vs5.0
Open GL4.4vs4.5
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUnono
SLI/Crossfirenovsyes
Dedicatedyesvsyes
Comparison

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended ProcessorIntel Core i5-4430 3.0GHzvsIntel Core i7-3770K 4-Core 3.5GHz
Recommended RAM8 GBvs8 GB
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution1920x1080vs2560x1440

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewOverview
Radeon R7 260X Crossfire is a solution of two Radeon R7 260X put together using AMD's Crossfire Technology.

Architecture
Each Radeon R7 260X Equips a GPU Codenamed Bonaire XTX which is a Second Gen GCN GPU and is an upgraded version of the Bonaire XT GPU previously used on Radeon 7790. Each Bonaire XT has 14 Compute Units activated and thus offers 896 Shader Processing Units, 56 TMUs and 16 ROPs.

GPU
The Central Unit of each GPU is clocked at 1100MHz.

Memory
Each GPU is equipped with fast GDDR5 and Accesses the Frame Buffer through a 128-bit Memory Interface. The Memory Clock Operates at 1625Hz.

Memory: Frame Buffer
Each GPU can fill up a Memory Pool of up to 2GB.

Power Consumption
Power Consumption is around 230W.

Performance
Gaming benchmarks prove that at 1920x1080, the best suited resolution, Radeon R7 260X Crossfire's Performance stands between GeForce GTX 960 and Radeon R9 380.

System Suggestions
Radeon R7 260X is best suited for resolutions up to and including 1920x1080. We recommend a Performance Processor and 8GB of RAM for Optimal Performance.
GeForce GTX 690 is a dual-GPU graphics card solution of two GeForce GTX 680 (not SLI) and part of the 600 Series released by NVIDIA in 2012.
As usual and a hindrance of dual-GPU graphics cards, the clock frequencies had to be reduced. However, NVIDIA managed to almost double-cross this problem by developing Turbo Boost technology that sets the GPU's core clock from 915 to 1019MHz. The other specs, such as the number of cores, memory speed, and memory bandwidth per GPU are the same on both cards.
The Performance is mind-blowing and indicated for gamers that use demanding technologies, such as Tesselation, paired with extreme resolutions and on games already Very Demanding from the start, such as Metro 2033 and The Witcher 2. GeForce GTX 690 is less expensive and energy consuming than GTX 680 put in Dual SLI.
Recommended CPU
Possible GPU Upgrades
-
-
GPU Variants
-
-