Quadro P520 vs GeForce GTX 260 216

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated609
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data20.80
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGT200GP108
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date16 September 2008 (16 years ago)23 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$299 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 cores216384
Core clock speed576 MHz1303 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1493 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate41.4735.83
Floating-point processing power0.5365 TFLOPS1.147 TFLOPS
ROPs2816
TMUs7224

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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount896 MB2 GB
Memory bus width448 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/s48.06 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA1.36.1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 16 September 2008 23 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 18 Watt

Quadro P520 has an age advantage of 10 years, a 128.6% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 911.1% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 and Quadro P520. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 is a desktop card while Quadro P520 is a mobile workstation one.


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 GTX 260 Core 216
GeForce GTX 260 Core 216
NVIDIA Quadro P520
Quadro P520

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.1 14 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 104 votes

Rate Quadro P520 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.