Radeon PRO W7700 vs GeForce GTX 260 216 Rev. 2
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 61 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 56.20 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 18.28 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024) |
| GPU code name | GT200B | Navi 32 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 27 November 2008 (15 years ago) | 13 November 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $299 | $999 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 cores | 216 | 3072 |
| Core clock speed | 576 MHz | 1900 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2600 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,400 million | 28,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 171 Watt | 190 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 41.47 | 499.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.5365 TFLOPS | 31.95 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 28 | 96 |
| TMUs | 72 | 192 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 48 |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 241 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | 1x 8-pin |
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 type | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 896 MB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 448 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 999 MHz | 2250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 111.9 GB/s | 576.0 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 Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| CUDA | 1.3 | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 27 November 2008 | 13 November 2023 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 896 MB | 16 GB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 171 Watt | 190 Watt |
GTX 260 216 Rev. 2 has 11.1% lower power consumption.
PRO W7700, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 14 years, a 1728.6% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1000% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2 and Radeon PRO W7700. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2 is a desktop card while Radeon PRO W7700 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
