GeForce FX 5700 vs GTX 260

VS

Aggregate performance score

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

GTX 260
2008
896 MB GDDR3, 182 Watt
3.15
+3050%

GTX 260 outperforms FX 5700 by a whopping 3050% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7511448
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.16no data
Power efficiency1.190.27
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameGT200NV36
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date16 June 2008 (16 years ago)23 October 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 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 cores192no data
Core clock speed576 MHz425 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million82 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt25 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate36.861.700
Floating-point processing power0.4769 TFLOPSno data
ROPs284
TMUs644

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 x16AGP 8x
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone
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 typeGDDR3DDR
Maximum RAM amount896 MB128 MB
Memory bus width448 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz250 MHz
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/s16 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVIHDTV1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
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)9.0a
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL2.11.5 (2.1)
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
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.

GTX 260 3.15
+3050%
FX 5700 0.10

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 1215
+2938%
FX 5700 40

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.15 0.10
Recency 16 June 2008 23 October 2003
Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 128 MB
Chip lithography 65 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 25 Watt

GTX 260 has a 3050% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 600% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

FX 5700, on the other hand, has 628% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 260 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5700 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 GTX 260
GeForce GTX 260
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700
GeForce FX 5700

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.


3.8 606 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 71 vote

Rate GeForce FX 5700 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.