Radeon RX 5700 XT vs GeForce GTX 260

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 260 and Radeon RX 5700 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 260
2008, $449
896 MB GDDR3, 182 Watt
2.86
RX 5700 XT
2019, $399
8 GB GDDR6, 225 Watt
38.31
+1240%

5700 XT outperforms GTX 260 by a whopping 1240% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking843139
Place by popularitynot in top-10050
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1432.25
Power efficiency1.2213.26
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameGT200Navi 10
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date16 June 2008 (18 years ago)7 July 2019 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 $399

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RX 5700 XT has 22936% 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 cores1922560
Core clock speed576 MHz1605 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1905 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million10,300 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt225 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate36.86304.8
Floating-point processing power0.4769 TFLOPS9.754 TFLOPS
ROPs2864
TMUs64160
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 mm272 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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
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 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Readyno data+
Multi Monitorno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.8
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A+
CUDA+-

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 2.86
RX 5700 XT 38.31
+1240%

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
RX 5700 XT 16029
+1238%
Samples: 18393

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 HD9−10
−92.8%
125
1440p5−676
+1420%
4K3−447
+1467%

Cost per frame, $

1080p49.893.19
+93.6%
1440p89.805.25
+94.2%
4K149.678.49
+94.3%
  • RX 5700 XT has 94% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX 5700 XT has 94% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX 5700 XT has 94% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 175 175
Counter-Strike 2 347 347
Cyberpunk 2077 78 78
Resident Evil 4 Remake 145 145

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 133 133
Battlefield 5 119 119
Counter-Strike 2 308 308
Cyberpunk 2077 78 78
Far Cry 5 138 138
Fortnite 223 223
Forza Horizon 4 155 155
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 177 177
Valorant 313 313

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 78 78
Battlefield 5 110 110
Counter-Strike 2 177 177
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 75 75
Dota 2 92 92
Far Cry 5 130 130
Fortnite 179 179
Forza Horizon 4 154 154
Grand Theft Auto V 145 145
Metro Exodus 97 97
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 166 166
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 154 154
Valorant 294 294

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 105 105
Cyberpunk 2077 67 67
Dota 2 103 103
Far Cry 5 111 111
Forza Horizon 4 148 148
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 139 139
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 93 93
Valorant 159 159

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 143 143

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 105 105
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Grand Theft Auto V 79 79
Metro Exodus 57 57
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 286 286

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 89 89
Cyberpunk 2077 40 40
Far Cry 5 97 97
Forza Horizon 4 119 119
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 70−75 70−75

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 93 93

4K
High

Atomic Heart 30−35 30−35
Counter-Strike 2 28 28
Grand Theft Auto V 79 79
Metro Exodus 35 35
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 54 54
Valorant 242 242

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60 60
Counter-Strike 2 45−50 45−50
Cyberpunk 2077 17 17
Dota 2 93 93
Far Cry 5 53 53
Forza Horizon 4 79 79
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 53 53

4K
Epic

Fortnite 45 45

This is how GTX 260 and RX 5700 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 5700 XT is 1289% faster in 1080p
  • RX 5700 XT is 1420% faster in 1440p
  • RX 5700 XT is 1467% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.86 38.31
Recency 16 June 2008 7 July 2019
Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 225 Watt

GTX 260 has 19% lower power consumption.

RX 5700 XT, on the other hand, has a 1240% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 814% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 89% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 5700 XT 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.


3.6 711 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 10347 votes

Rate Radeon RX 5700 XT 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 Radeon RX 5700 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.