Arc A580 vs GeForce GTS 250

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTS 250 and Arc A580, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTS 250
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 150 Watt
1.54

Arc A580 outperforms GTS 250 by a whopping 1913% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking973182
Place by popularitynot in top-10084
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.08no data
Power efficiency0.7112.19
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameG92BDG2-512
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date4 March 2009 (15 years ago)10 October 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores1283072
Core clock speed738 MHz1700 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2000 MHz
Number of transistors754 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt175 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate44.93384.0
Floating-point processing power0.3871 TFLOPS12.29 TFLOPS
ROPs1696
TMUs64192
Tensor Coresno data384
Ray Tracing Coresno data24

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
Length229 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin2x 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 amount1 GB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1100 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth70.4 GB/s512.0 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVI1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.6
OpenGL3.04.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTS 250 1.54
Arc A580 31.00
+1913%

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.

GTS 250 592
Arc A580 11916
+1913%

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 HD5−6
−1960%
103
+1960%
1440p2−3
−2650%
55
+2650%
4K1−2
−3200%
33
+3200%

Cost per frame, $

1080p39.80no data
1440p99.50no data
4K199.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 98
+0%
98
+0%
Elden Ring 81
+0%
81
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 83
+0%
83
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 258
+0%
258
+0%
Metro Exodus 134
+0%
134
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 74
+0%
74
+0%
Dota 2 86
+0%
86
+0%
Elden Ring 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 63
+0%
63
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 214
+0%
214
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 86
+0%
86
+0%
Metro Exodus 97
+0%
97
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
World of Tanks 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 67
+0%
67
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 177
+0%
177
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 37
+0%
37
+0%
Elden Ring 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 37
+0%
37
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
World of Tanks 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 44
+0%
44
+0%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130
+0%
130
+0%
Metro Exodus 91
+0%
91
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55
+0%
55
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 19
+0%
19
+0%
Dota 2 38
+0%
38
+0%
Elden Ring 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 38
+0%
38
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 38
+0%
38
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 73
+0%
73
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

This is how GTS 250 and Arc A580 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A580 is 1960% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A580 is 2650% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A580 is 3200% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.54 31.00
Recency 4 March 2009 10 October 2023
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 175 Watt

GTS 250 has 16.7% lower power consumption.

Arc A580, on the other hand, has a 1913% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 816.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A580 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 250 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
GeForce GTS 250
Intel Arc A580
Arc A580

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.


3.5 1681 vote

Rate GeForce GTS 250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 331 vote

Rate Arc A580 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.