Quadro RTX A6000 vs GeForce GTX 260

#ad 
Buy
GTX 260 GTX 260 Core 216 GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2 GTX 260 OEM GTX 260 Rev. 2
VS
#ad 
Buy
A10 PCIe A10G A40 PCIe CMP 90HX Quadro RTX 8100 Quadro RTX 8200 Quadro RTX A6000 RTX A40 RTX A4500 RTX A5000 RTX A5000-12Q RTX A5500

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 260 with Quadro RTX A6000, including specs and performance data.

GTX 260
2008
896 MB GDDR3, 182 Watt
3.02

RTX A6000 outperforms GTX 260 by a whopping 1784% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
GTX 260 GTX 260
RTX A6000 RTX A6000

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking77143
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1511.84
Power efficiency1.1713.41
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGT200GA102
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date16 June 2008 (16 years ago)5 October 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 $4,649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

RTX A6000 has 7793% 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 cores19210752
Core clock speed576 MHz1410 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1800 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt300 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate36.86604.8
Floating-point processing power0.4769 TFLOPS38.71 TFLOPS
ROPs28112
TMUs64336
Tensor Coresno data336
Ray Tracing Coresno data84

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mm267 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin8-pin EPS
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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount896 MB48 GB
Memory bus width448 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/s768.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 DVIHDTV4x DisplayPort 1.4a
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.7
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+8.6
DLSS-+

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.

GTX 260 3.02
RTX A6000 56.89
+1784%
  • Passmark

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 1207
RTX A6000 22745
+1784%

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 HD8−9
−1875%
158
+1875%
1440p6−7
−1950%
123
+1950%
4K5−6
−2020%
106
+2020%

Cost per frame, $

1080p56.13
−90.7%
29.42
+90.7%
1440p74.83
−98%
37.80
+98%
4K89.80
−105%
43.86
+105%
  • RTX A6000 has 91% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RTX A6000 has 98% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RTX A6000 has 105% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Counter-Strike 2 280−290
+0%
280−290
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Battlefield 5 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 280−290
+0%
280−290
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 52
+0%
52
+0%
Fortnite 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 300−310
+0%
300−310
+0%
Battlefield 5 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 280−290
+0%
280−290
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Dota 2 139
+0%
139
+0%
Far Cry 5 53
+0%
53
+0%
Fortnite 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 128
+0%
128
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 98
+0%
98
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 307
+0%
307
+0%
Valorant 300−310
+0%
300−310
+0%
Battlefield 5 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Dota 2 131
+0%
131
+0%
Far Cry 5 52
+0%
52
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 180
+0%
180
+0%
Valorant 300−310
+0%
300−310
+0%
Fortnite 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 96
+0%
96
+0%
Metro Exodus 84
+0%
84
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 52
+0%
52
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 155
+0%
155
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 70
+0%
70
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 146
+0%
146
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 128
+0%
128
+0%
Far Cry 5 50
+0%
50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

This is how GTX 260 and RTX A6000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX A6000 is 1875% faster in 1080p
  • RTX A6000 is 1950% faster in 1440p
  • RTX A6000 is 2020% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 3.02 56.89
Recency 16 June 2008 5 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 48 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 300 Watt

GTX 260 has 64.8% lower power consumption.

RTX A6000, on the other hand, has a 1783.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 5385.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 712.5% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX A6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 260 is a desktop card while Quadro RTX A6000 is a workstation one.

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 Quadro RTX A6000
Quadro RTX A6000
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

GTX 260 GeForce GTX 260
vs
GT 1010 GeForce GT 1010
RTX A6000 Quadro RTX A6000
vs
RTX A5000 RTX A5000
GTX 260 GeForce GTX 260
vs
GTX 295 GeForce GTX 295
ATI Rage 128 PRO Ultra Rage 128 PRO Ultra
vs
Riva TNT2 Riva TNT2
ATI Rage 128 VR Rage 128 VR
vs
RTX 2050 Mobile RTX 2050 Mobile
ATI 3D Rage PRO PCI 3D Rage PRO PCI
vs
Riva 128ZX Riva 128ZX
GTX 460 GTX 460
vs
GT 440 Mac Edition GT 440 Mac Edition
GTS 250 GTS 250
vs
HD Graphics P530 HD Graphics P530
9300 GE 9300 GE
vs
ATI Rage XL Rage XL
9300 GE 9300 GE
vs
HD Graphics 12EU HD Graphics 12EU
8800 GTS 512 8800 GTS 512
vs
GTX 260 216 GTX 260 Core 216
8800 GTX 8800 GTX
vs
Go 7800 GTX SLI Go 7800 GTX SLI
7950 GX2 7950 GX2
vs
Radeon 760M 760M

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.7
618 votes

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

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

Rate Quadro RTX A6000 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 Quadro RTX A6000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.