GeForce RTX 3090 vs GTX 260

Place in the ranking	747	24
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.14	14.89
Power efficiency	1.20	13.68
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GT200	GA102
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	16 June 2008 (16 years ago)	1 September 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$449	$1,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 3090 has 10536% better value for money than GTX 260.

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	192	10496
Core clock speed	576 MHz	1395 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1695 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	182 Watt	350 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	36.86	556.0
Floating-point processing power	0.4769 TFLOPS	35.58 TFLOPS
ROPs	28	112
TMUs	64	328
Tensor Cores	no data	328
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	82

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	336 mm
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	3-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	1x 12-pin
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 type	GDDR3	GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount	896 MB	24 GB
Memory bus width	448 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	999 MHz	1219 MHz
Memory bandwidth	111.9 GB/s	936.2 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 Connectors	Dual Link DVIHDTV	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no data

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	6.5
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
CUDA	+	8.5

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

RTX 3090 69.29
+2100%

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

RTX 3090 26731
+2100%

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	9−10 −2156%	203 +2156%
1440p	5−6 −2520%	131 +2520%
4K	4−5 −2150%	90 +2150%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	49.89	7.38
1440p	89.80	11.44
4K	112.25	16.66

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

207

+0%

207

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	159 +0%	159 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	114 +0%	114 +0%
Battlefield 5	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	176 +0%	176 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%
Hitman 3	117 +0%	117 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	250−260 +0%	250−260 +0%
Metro Exodus	144 +0%	144 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	130 +0%	130 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	290−300 +0%	290−300 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	200 +0%	200 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	247 +0%	247 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	105 +0%	105 +0%
Battlefield 5	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	151 +0%	151 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%
Hitman 3	117 +0%	117 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	250−260 +0%	250−260 +0%
Metro Exodus	144 +0%	144 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	402 +0%	402 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	199 +0%	199 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	108 +0%	108 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	91 +0%	91 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	134 +0%	134 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	217 +0%	217 +0%
Hitman 3	116 +0%	116 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	295 +0%	295 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	351 +0%	351 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	181 +0%	181 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	107 +0%	107 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

129

+0%

129

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	93 +0%	93 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	79 +0%	79 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	93 +0%	93 +0%
Far Cry 5	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Hitman 3	115 +0%	115 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	233 +0%	233 +0%
Metro Exodus	139 +0%	139 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	266 +0%	266 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	152 +0%	152 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	203 +0%	203 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

127

+0%

127

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Hitman 3	83 +0%	83 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	141 +0%	141 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	153 +0%	153 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	70 +0%	70 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	57 +0%	57 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	46 +0%	46 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	153 +0%	153 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	159 +0%	159 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60 +0%	60 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

111

+0%

111

+0%

This is how GTX 260 and RTX 3090 compete in popular games:

RTX 3090 is 2156% faster in 1080p
RTX 3090 is 2520% faster in 1440p
RTX 3090 is 2150% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.15	69.29
Recency	16 June 2008	1 September 2020
Maximum RAM amount	896 MB	24 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	182 Watt	350 Watt

GTX 260 has 92.3% lower power consumption.

RTX 3090, on the other hand, has a 2099.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 2642.9% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 712.5% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3090 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.