RTX 6000 Ada Generation vs GeForce GTX 260

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 260 with RTX 6000 Ada Generation, including specs and performance data.

GTX 260
2008
896 MB GDDR3, 182 Watt
2.86

RTX 6000 Ada Generation outperforms GTX 260 by a whopping 2283% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking77221
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.148.24
Power efficiency1.1716.86
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGT200AD102
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date16 June 2008 (16 years ago)3 December 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 $6,799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 5786% 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 cores19218176
Core clock speed576 MHz915 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2505 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million76,300 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt300 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate36.861,423
Floating-point processing power0.4769 TFLOPS91.06 TFLOPS
ROPs28192
TMUs64568
Tensor Coresno data568
Ray Tracing Coresno data142

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-pin1x 16-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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount896 MB48 GB
Memory bus width448 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/s960.0 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 Model4.06.8
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+8.9
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 2.86
RTX 6000 Ada Generation 68.14
+2283%

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 6000 Ada Generation 28716
+2279%

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 HD7−8
−2514%
183
+2514%
1440p6−7
−2567%
160
+2567%
4K4−5
−2625%
109
+2625%

Cost per frame, $

1080p64.14
−72.6%
37.15
+72.6%
1440p74.83
−76.1%
42.49
+76.1%
4K112.25
−80%
62.38
+80%
  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 73% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 76% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 80% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Far Cry 5 130
+0%
130
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Far Cry 5 126
+0%
126
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Metro Exodus 114
+0%
114
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 489
+0%
489
+0%
Valorant 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Far Cry 5 118
+0%
118
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 260
+0%
260
+0%
Valorant 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550
+0%
500−550
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Metro Exodus 95
+0%
95
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 450−500
+0%
450−500
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 118
+0%
118
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 219
+0%
219
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 90
+0%
90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 184
+0%
184
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 115
+0%
115
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

This is how GTX 260 and RTX 6000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 2514% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 2567% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 2625% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.86 68.14
Recency 16 June 2008 3 December 2022
Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 48 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 300 Watt

GTX 260 has 64.8% lower power consumption.

RTX 6000 Ada Generation, on the other hand, has a 2282.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 5385.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 6000 Ada Generation 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 RTX 6000 Ada Generation 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 RTX 6000 Ada Generation
RTX 6000 Ada Generation

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.


3.7 621 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 106 votes

Rate RTX 6000 Ada Generation 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 RTX 6000 Ada Generation, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.