GeForce RTX 3070 vs GTX 260

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 260 and GeForce RTX 3070, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 260
2008, $449
896 MB GDDR3, 182 Watt
2.87

RTX 3070 outperforms GTX 260 by a whopping 1742% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking84363
Place by popularitynot in top-10021
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1444.30
Power efficiency1.2318.66
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameGT200GA104
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date16 June 2008 (18 years ago)1 September 2020 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 $499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

RTX 3070 has 31543% better value for money than GTX 260.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1925888
Core clock speed576 MHz1500 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1725 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million17,400 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt220 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate36.86317.4
Floating-point processing power0.4769 TFLOPS20.31 TFLOPS
ROPs2896
TMUs64184
Tensor Coresno data184
Ray Tracing Coresno data46
L1 Cacheno data5.8 MB
L2 Cache224 KB4 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mm242 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin1x 12-pin
SLI options+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount896 MB8 GB
Memory bus width448 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/s448.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsDual Link DVIHDTV1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.5
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA+8.5
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GTX 260 2.87
RTX 3070 52.86
+1742%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 260 1198
Samples: 3081
RTX 3070 22068
+1742%
Samples: 39512

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD8−9
−94.6%
149
1440p5−699
+1880%
4K3−463
+2000%

Cost per frame, $

1080p56.133.35
+94%
1440p89.805.04
+94.4%
4K149.677.92
+94.7%
  • RTX 3070 has 94% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RTX 3070 has 94% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RTX 3070 has 95% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 263 263
Counter-Strike 2 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 147 147
Resident Evil 4 Remake 198 198

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 196 196
Battlefield 5 149 149
Counter-Strike 2 330 330
Cyberpunk 2077 139 139
Far Cry 5 154 154
Fortnite 230−240 230−240
Forza Horizon 4 200−210 200−210
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 300−350 300−350

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 113 113
Battlefield 5 132 132
Counter-Strike 2 257 257
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 126 126
Dota 2 133 133
Far Cry 5 148 148
Fortnite 230−240 230−240
Forza Horizon 4 200−210 200−210
Grand Theft Auto V 139 139
Metro Exodus 120 120
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 230 230
Valorant 300−350 300−350

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 119 119
Cyberpunk 2077 102 102
Dota 2 125 125
Far Cry 5 141 141
Forza Horizon 4 200−210 200−210
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 121 121
Valorant 237 237

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 230−240 230−240

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 167 167
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 350−400 350−400
Grand Theft Auto V 98 98
Metro Exodus 75 75
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 350−400 350−400

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 103 103
Cyberpunk 2077 62 62
Far Cry 5 125 125
Forza Horizon 4 160−170 160−170
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 110−120 110−120

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 140−150 140−150

4K
High

Atomic Heart 45−50 45−50
Counter-Strike 2 43 43
Grand Theft Auto V 117 117
Metro Exodus 49 49
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90 90
Valorant 300−350 300−350

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 70 70
Counter-Strike 2 65−70 65−70
Cyberpunk 2077 30 30
Dota 2 125 125
Far Cry 5 70 70
Forza Horizon 4 110−120 110−120
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95 90−95

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 75−80

This is how GTX 260 and RTX 3070 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3070 is 1763% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3070 is 1880% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 3070 is 2000% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.87 52.86
Recency 16 June 2008 1 September 2020
Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 220 Watt

GTX 260 has 17% lower power consumption.

RTX 3070, on the other hand, has a 1742% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 814% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 88% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3070 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260 in performance tests.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 710 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 260 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 15257 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3070 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 260 or GeForce RTX 3070, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.