The Radeon R7 260X is the comparison's loser – it's at least 2x slower gaming GPU than the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti and it's also a much worse value for money, as it's only $147.47 cheaper!
Advantages of the Radeon R7 260X
- Up to 40% cheaper – $221.90 vs $369.37
- Consumes up to 4% less energy – 115 vs 120 Watts
Advantages of the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
- At least 2x faster GPU for gaming
- A much better value for money for gaming
- Up to 200% more VRAM memory – 6 vs 2 GB
Radeon R7 260X vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti for Gaming
The GPU's performance in selected game and settings
Radeon R7 260X
Oct 8th, 2013
Average FPS
49
59%
Min 1% FPS
21
48%
Price, €
€221.9
100%
Value, €/FPS
€4.52/FPS
98%
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
Feb 22nd, 2019
Average FPS
83
100%
Min 1% FPS
44
100%
Price, €
€369.37
60%
Value, €/FPS
€4.45/FPS
100%
Buy on Amazon
€369.37
In Stock
Buy on Amazon
€162.12
In Stock
Radeon R7 260X vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti in My Games
The FPS you'll get in saved games
The FPS you'll get in saved games
Add a Game
Select Settings
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Radeon R7 260X vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti in synthetic GPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Radeon R7 260X vs GeForce GTX 1660 Ti in core GPU performance specifications
Radeon R7 260X
Oct 8th, 2013
Memory
2 GB
33%
Memory Bandwidth
104 GB/s
36%
Pixel Fillrate
17.6 GPixel/s
21%
Texture Fillrate
61.6 GTexel/s
36%
FP32
1.971 TFLOPS
36%
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
Feb 22nd, 2019
Memory
6 GB
100%
Memory Bandwidth
288 GB/s
100%
Pixel Fillrate
84.96 GPixel/s
100%
Texture Fillrate
169.9 GTexel/s
100%
FP32
5.437 TFLOPS
100%
Specifications
Comparison of all specifications
Radeon R7 260X | SpecificationsComparison of all specifications | GeForce GTX 1660 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Oct 8th, 2013 | Release Date | Feb 22nd, 2019 |
$139.00 | MSRP | $279.00 |
| Volcanic Islands | Generation | GeForce 16 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
115 W | Power Consumption | 120 W |
| Memory | ||
| 2 GB | Memory Size | 6 GB |
| GDDR5 | Memory Type | GDDR6 |
| 128-bit | Memory Bus | 192-bit |
| 104 GB/s | Bandwidth | 288 GB/s |
| Theoretical Performance | ||
| 17.6 GPixel/s | Pixel Fillrate | 84.96 GPixel/s |
| 61.6 GTexel/s | Texture Fillrate | 169.9 GTexel/s |
| 1.971 TFLOPS | FP32 | 5.437 TFLOPS |
