NVS 3100M vs GeForce GTX 260

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 260 with NVS 3100M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 260
2008
896 MB GDDR3, 182 Watt
3.17
+498%

GTX 260 outperforms NVS 3100M by a whopping 498% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking7141187
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.36no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GT2xx (2009−2012)
GPU code nameGT200N10M-NS
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date16 June 2008 (16 years ago)7 January 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 no data
Current price$49 (0.1x MSRP)$269

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 260 and NVS 3100M have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores19216
CUDA cores192no data
Core clock speed576 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt14 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate36.9 billion/sec4.848
Floating-point performance476.9 gflops46.98 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 260 and NVS 3100M 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.

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm)no data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR3GDDR3, DDR3
Maximum RAM amount896 MB512 MB
Memory bus width448 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/s12.64 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVIHDTVNo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.04.1
OpenGL2.13.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+1.2

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
+498%
NVS 3100M 0.53

GeForce GTX 260 outperforms NVS 3100M by 498% 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
+500%
NVS 3100M 204

GeForce GTX 260 outperforms NVS 3100M by 500% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Hitman 3 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+491%
10−12
−491%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+471%
7−8
−471%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+456%
9−10
−456%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Hitman 3 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+491%
10−12
−491%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+471%
7−8
−471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+456%
9−10
−456%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+491%
10−12
−491%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+471%
7−8
−471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+456%
9−10
−456%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+425%
4−5
−425%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Hitman 3 35−40
+483%
6−7
−483%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%

4K
High Preset

Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+425%
4−5
−425%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.17 0.53
Recency 16 June 2008 7 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 512 MB
Chip lithography 65 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 14 Watt

The GeForce GTX 260 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 3100M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 260 is a desktop card while NVS 3100M 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
GeForce GTX 260
NVIDIA NVS 3100M
NVS 3100M

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.


3.7 565 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 126 votes

Rate NVS 3100M 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.