AMD paper-launched the Radeon R7 260 in December. The specifications it published, along with the $110 price it announced, got me excited. Sure, high-end cards like the Radeon R9 290X and GeForce GTX 780 Ti get more of the glory. But for gamers on a budget, the mainstream boards derived from that flagship technology are the real heroes. Take AMD's Radeon HD 7770, for example. It makes 1920x1080 a viable resolution at low to medium detail settings. Understandably, then, the prospect of an even faster Radeon R7 260 for the same $110 was very appealing. I eagerly waited for the product to show up mid-January.
The fifteenth came and went. Now it's February and, as I write this, there is only one Radeon R7 260 on Newegg, Asus' R7260-1GD5 with 1 GB of memory for $140 (Ed.: Just prior to publication, an MSI model appeared for $125, too). In comparison, the same company's R7260X-DC2OC-2GD5, based on a faster version of the Bonaire GPU with twice as much memory, goes for $150. Other 260Xes with 2 GB sell for as little as $130. Needless to say, as a result of dubious inventory and a high price on the models we can find, my enthusiasm about AMD's Radeon R7 260 took a severe beating.
Right now, it appears that most of the add-in board partners are choosing not to sell their own R7 260s, preferring instead to push their Radeon HD 7770s until those are gone, along with the Radeon R7 260X. Although the 260's prospects look grim right now, we also know that things change quickly in the graphics world. So, we're giving the card a closer look, despite its precarious position.

The Radeon R7 260 employs a cut-down version of the Bonaire GPU, first seen in the Radeon HD 7790 and then in the Radeon R7 260X. Two of the processor's 14 Compute Units are disabled, resulting in a total of 768 shaders and 48 texture units. The render back-end is untouched; two ROP partitions can handle 16 pixels per clock, while a pair of 64-bit dual-channel memory controllers yield an aggregate 128-bit memory interface. And because the Radeon R7 260 utilizes Bonaire, it does support AMD's TrueAudio feature (though we still haven't seen any software optimized for this capability).
| GeForce GTX 650 Ti | Radeon HD 7770 | Radeon R7 260 | Radeon R7 260X | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shaders | 768 | 640 | 768 | 896 |
| Texture Units | 64 | 40 | 48 | 56 |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 |
| Process Technology | 28 nm | 28 nm | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Core/Boost Clock | 925 MHz | 1 GHz | 1000 MHz | 1100 MHz |
| Memory Clock | 1350 MHz | 1125 MHz | 1500 MHz | 1625 MHz |
| Memory Bus | 128-bit | 128-bit | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| Memory Bandwidth | 86.4 GB/s | 72 GB/s | 96 GB/s | 104 GB/s |
| Graphics Memory | 1 or 2 GB GDDR5 | 1 GB GDDR5 | 1 or 2 GB GDDR5 | 1 or 2 GB GDDR5 |
| Power Connectors | 1 x 6-pin | 1 x 6-pin | 1 x 6-pin | 1 x 6-pin |
| Maximum TDP | 110 W | 80 W | 95 W | 115 W |
| Newegg Price Range | $110-$175 | $110-$170 | $125-$140 | $130 to $150 |
With roughly 10%-lower clocks, 5% less memory bandwidth, and approximately 14% fewer pixel shaders than the Radeon R7 260X, I expect the Radeon R7 260 to perform right between the 260X and Radeon HD 7770.
Asus' R7260-1GD5

Let's have a look at the one Radeon R7 260 we could get our hands on, Asus' R7260-1GD5. The front of the card is covered in a fan shroud with the company's classic black and red color scheme. It appears slightly longer than 8.5". But flip it over and you'll see that the PCB is much smaller; the cooler extends far past its edge. The circuit board is 7" x 4.5". While the card looks substantially-sized, it weighs just over one pound.

The R7260-1GD5 adheres to AMD's reference clock rates, with a 1000 MHz GPU and GDDR5 memory operating at up to 1500 MHz. Again, you only get 1 GB, which we'd expect to limit the resolutions and detail settings that are playable.

The solid aluminum heat sink is cooled by two 75 mm low-profile fans. There's one six-pin auxiliary power connector and one CrossFire connector, used to enable dual-card configurations.

Asus arms its card's rear I/O bracket with one full-sized DisplayPort output, HDMI, and a dual-link DVI connector. Even legacy VGA is covered through a bundled adapter.

The rest of the bundle is composed of a CrossFire connector, a driver/software CD, and a setup booklet. Asus' GPU Tweak utility supports this board, and that small piece of software works very well for overclocking.
We'll compare the Radeon R7 260 to a wide range of cards from $80 to $140; we want a good overview of the budget-oriented marketplace. All of our benchmarks are run at 1920x1080 to show how AMD's latest handles Full HD.
| Test System | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPU | Intel Core i5-2550K (Sandy Bridge), Overclocked to 4.2 GHz @ 1.3 V | ||||
| Motherboard | Asus P8Z77-V LX. LGA 1155, Chipset: Intel Z77M | ||||
| Networking | On-Board Gigabit LAN controller | ||||
| Memory | Corsair Performance Memory, 4 x 4 GB, 1866 MT/s, CL 9-9-9-24-1T | ||||
| Graphics | XFX Radeon R7 250 GDDR5 1000/1050 MHz GPU, 1 GB GDDR5 at 1150 MHz (4600 MT/s) Reference AMD Radeon HD 7750 800 MHz GPU, 1 GB GDDR5 at 1125 MHz (4500 MT/s) Gigabyte Radeon HD 7770 1000 MHz GPU, 1 GB GDDR5 at 1125 MHz (4500 MT/s) Gigabyte Radeon R7 260 1000 MHz GPU, 1 GB GDDR5 at 1500 MHz (6000 MT/s) Reference Radeon R7 260X 1100 MHz GPU, 2 GB GDDR5 at 1625 MHz (6500 MT/s) Reference Nvidia GT 640 900 MHz GPU, 1 GB DDR3 at 891 MHz (1782 MT/s) Gigabyte Nvidia GTX 650 1058 MHz GPU, 1 GB DDR3 at 1250 MHz (5000 MT/s) Reference Nvidia GTX 650 Ti 925 MHz GPU, 1 GB DDR3 at 1350 MHz (5400 MT/s) | ||||
| Hard Drive | Samsung 840 Pro, 256 GB SSD, SATA 6Gb/s | ||||
| Power | XFX PRO850W, ATX12V, EPS12V | ||||
| Software and Drivers | |||||
| Operating System | Microsoft Windows 8 Pro x64 | ||||
| DirectX | DirectX 11 | ||||
| Graphics Drivers | AMD Catalyst 13.11 Beta 9.5, Nvidia GeForce 332.21 WHQL | ||||

We've almost completely eliminated mechanical storage in the lab, and instead lean on solid-state drives to alleviate I/O-related bottlenecks. Samsung sent all of our offices 256 GB 840 Pros, so we standardize on these exceptional SSDs.

Naturally, discrete graphics cards require a substantial amount of stable power, so XFX sent along its PRO850W 80 PLUS Bronze-certified power supply. This modular PSU employs a single +12 V rail rated for 70 A. XFX claims that this unit provides 850 W of continuous power (not peak) at 50 degrees Celsius (a higher temperature than you'll find inside most enclosures).
| Benchmark Configuration | |
|---|---|
| 3D Games | |
| Metro: Last Light | Version 1.0.0.14, Built-in Benchmark |
| Grid 2 | Version 1.8.85.8679, Built-in Benchmark Scene D6 |
| Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag | Version 1.05, Custom THG Benchmark, 40-Sec |
| Battlefield 4 | Version 1.0.0.1, Custom THG Benchmark, 90-Sec |
| BioShock Infinite | Version 1.1.24.21018, Built-in Benchmark |
Our first round of tests reflects performance in Battlefield 4 at 1920x1080 using the game's Medium quality preset.


The Radeon R7 260 never dips below 60 frames per second, which is good news given how nice Battlefield 4 looks, even at dialed-down detail levels. In comparison, that's slightly better than twice the performance of AMD's Radeon R7 250 GDDR5.


The frame time variance results are generally low, except for AMD's Radeon R7 250, which demonstrates spikes throughout our benchmark run.


Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag proves more taxing than Battlefield 4 at 1920x1080, so we have to drop its detail level to accommodate the slower cards. Still, the Radeon R7 260 pushes through, maintaining minimum frame rates in excess of 50 through our run.


We've seen low frame time variance results from this title before, so it's no surprise that these numbers are minimal, too. Even the cards that don't sustain at least 30 FPS deliver frames in a consistent enough manner to appear smooth in these two charts.


Metro: Last Light also requires that we scale back detail to keep the game playable across our selection of mainstream graphics cards. But the Radeon R7 260 manages a minimum frame rate of 40 and an average of 65 FPS, yielding a smooth experience at 1920x1080.


Only one card struggles with frame time variance: Nvidia's GeForce GT 640. Then again, its frame rates are so low that we can't call this a playable combination of settings for it. At lower resolutions, I suspect the problem might be ameliorated.


We already know BioShock Infinite to be much easier on graphics hardware than the previous three titles. Even the High preset poses no challenge for the Radeon R7 260, which remains above 40 FPS through our benchmark.


The slowest cards in our line-up of contenders suffer under frame time variance peaks, but only the GeForce GT 640's performance is problematic.


Grid 2 is easy enough to render that we're able to apply 2x MSAA and the High detail preset and reap playable frame rates from the top to bottom of our sample range.


There are no troublesome frame time variance measurements to point out except for a couple of isolated blips that weren't perceptible during our benchmark run.
Now we shift from game performance to power and temperature results.

The Radeon R7 260 uses quite a bit of power for a card with a 95 W TDP. In fact, it nearly paces the R7 260X under load, while using more power at idle.

Our thermal measurements are affected more by aftermarket cooling and power consumption than anything else. Asus' Radeon R7 260 certainly maintains acceptable temperatures under 70 °C subjected to full load. However, there are other lower-power boards that run a lot cooler.
Nothing puts our benchmarks into perspective like a chart of average performance. Right out of the gate, let's look at the aggregate results of the seven other cards we tested relative to AMD's new Radeon R7 260:

Put simply, the Radeon HD 7770 is about 15% slower than the new Radeon R7 260, and the 260X is about 11% faster. Those numbers don't sound like much, but the HD 7770 dropped as low as 33 FPS in some benchmarks, while the R7 260 never fell below 40. Particularly at 1920x1080, that's a significant margin. On the other hand, AMD's Radeon R7 260X performs better, but not so much that it facilitates higher resolutions. It might allow for a couple of more taxing details without dropping below 30 FPS. However, the two cards come pretty close to each other.
If I was writing this review last month, when the Radeon R7 260 paper-launched at $110, I would have drizzled praise all over it for making the Radeon HD 7770 obsolete. The Radeon R7 260X at $140 and R7 260 at $110 appear a formidable pair, indeed.
But one month later, the Radeon R7 260 is largely missing in action aside from a token entry selling for $140 (Ed.: And now a second model at $125, which we still consider too close to the 260X, found as low as $130). We're scratching our heads. The product we're reviewing is as expensive as competing Radeon R7 260X cards with two times more memory. Thirty dollars might not sound like much, but in the competitive space under $150, it's the difference between an exceptional deal and outright poor value. Perfect example: spending $10 more gets you Asus' R7260X-DC2OC-2GD5, which not only includes a faster GPU, but also twice as much on-board RAM.
An AMD representative we talked to ahead of this piece stated that the company samples hardware to its partners, which then decide what they want to sell. At least for now, it seems as though the add-in board folks are happy with the relationship between the Radeon HD 7770 at $110 and R7 260X at $140.
Here's a bit of perspective. With the GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost missing, the Radeon R7 260X rules at its price point. And the GeForce GTX 650 Ti is a little overpriced against AMD's Radeon HD 7770. I can't imagine there's a lot of incentive to create another space between those two successful products.
Regardless, it appears that the Radeon R7 260 isn't emerging as the value-oriented product we were anticipating, at least in the near future. That could, of course, change over time (and potentially quite quickly if Nvidia strikes with competitive-priced competition for the Radeon HD 7770). Until then, the Radeon R7 260 is too rare and too expensive to recommend over other, more compelling options in the same space.