GeForce 830M vs GTX 260

Place in performance ranking	714	783
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.36	0.56
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code name	GT200	N15?
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	16 June 2008 (16 years ago)	12 March 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$449	no data
Current price	$49 (0.1x MSRP)	$160

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GeForce 830M has 56% better value for money than GTX 260.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	192	256
CUDA cores	192	no data
Core clock speed	576 MHz	1029 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1150 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	182 Watt	33 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	36.9 billion/sec	18.40
Floating-point performance	476.9 gflops	588.8 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 260 and GeForce 830M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Bus support	no data	PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x8
Length	10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm)	no data
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	no data
SLI options	+	no data

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	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	896 MB	2 GB
Memory bus width	448 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	999 MHz	1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	111.9 GB/s	14.4 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

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	Dual Link DVIHDTV	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	no data
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no data

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boost	no data	2.0
Optimus	no data	+
GameWorks	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	4.0	5.1
OpenGL	2.1	4.5
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.1.126
CUDA	+	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

GTX 260 3.17
+21.5%

GeForce 830M 2.61

GTX 260 outperforms 830M by 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 260 1223
+21.3%

GeForce 830M 1008

GTX 260 outperforms 830M by 21% in Passmark.

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 HD

18−21
+5.9%

−5.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7
+20%

5−6

−20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +20%	10−11 −20%
Hitman 3	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +16.7%	18−20 −16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +16.7%	12−14 −16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 +20%	14−16 −20%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +20%	10−11 −20%
Hitman 3	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +16.7%	18−20 −16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +16.7%	12−14 −16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +14.3%	7 −14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 +20%	14−16 −20%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +20%	10−11 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +16.7%	18−20 −16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +16.7%	12−14 −16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +16.7%	6 −16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 +20%	14−16 −20%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+16.7%

6−7

−16.7%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hitman 3	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+16.7%

6−7

−16.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+0%

4−5

+0%

This is how GTX 260 and GeForce 830M compete in popular games:

GTX 260 is 6% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.17	2.61
Recency	16 June 2008	12 March 2014
Maximum RAM amount	896 MB	2 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	182 Watt	33 Watt