GeForce GT 220 vs GTX 260

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 260 and GeForce GT 220, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 260
2008
896 MB GDDR3, 182 Watt
2.72
+444%

260 outperforms 220 by a whopping 444% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8081267
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.13no data
Power efficiency1.200.69
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGT200GT216
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date16 June 2008 (17 years ago)12 October 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 $79.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

GTX 260 and GT 220 have a nearly equal value for money.

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores19248
Core clock speed576 MHz625 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt58 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °C105 °C
Texture fill rate36.8610.00
Floating-point processing power0.4769 TFLOPS0.1306 TFLOPS
ROPs288
TMUs6416
L2 Cache224 KB64 KB

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).

Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length267 mm168 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)4.376" (11.1 cm)
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 typeGDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount896 MB1 GB
Memory bus width448 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz790 MHz
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/s25.3 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsDual Link DVIHDTVVGADVIHDMI
Multi monitor support++
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x15362048x1536
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFS/PDIF + HDA

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.04.1
OpenGL2.13.1
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

GTX 260 2.72
+444%
GT 220 0.50

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 1204
+442%
Samples: 3052
GT 220 222
Samples: 2211

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 HD110−120
+424%
21
−424%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.08
−7.2%
3.81
+7.2%
  • GT 220 has 7% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how GTX 260 and GT 220 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 260 is 424% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 32 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.72 0.50
Recency 16 June 2008 12 October 2009
Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 58 Watt

GTX 260 has a 444% higher aggregate performance score.

GT 220, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 14.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 213.8% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 260 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 220 in performance tests.

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 GT 220
GeForce GT 220

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.


3.7 666 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 847 votes

Rate GeForce GT 220 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 260 or GeForce GT 220, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.