RTX A2000 vs GeForce GTX 260

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GTX 260 GTX 260 Core 216 GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2 GTX 260 OEM GTX 260 Rev. 2
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
RTX A1000 RTX A2000 RTX A2000 12 GB RTX A4000 RTX A4000H RTX A4500 RTX A5000 RTX A5000-8Q RTX A5000-12Q RTX A5500

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 260 with RTX A2000, including specs and performance data.

GTX 260
2008
896 MB GDDR3, 182 Watt
3.14

RTX A2000 outperforms GTX 260 by a whopping 1026% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GTX 260 GTX 260
RTX A2000 RTX A2000

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking763147
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1693.82
Power efficiency1.1834.62
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGT200GA106
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date16 June 2008 (16 years ago)10 August 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 $449

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RTX A2000 has 58538% 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 cores1923328
Core clock speed576 MHz562 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1200 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt70 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate36.86124.8
Floating-point processing power0.4769 TFLOPS7.987 TFLOPS
ROPs2848
TMUs64104
Tensor Coresno data104
Ray Tracing Coresno data26

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 mm167 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount896 MB6 GB
Memory bus width448 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/s288.0 GB/s

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 mini-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+8.6
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 3.14
RTX A2000 35.35
+1026%

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 1208
RTX A2000 13586
+1025%

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
−1100%
96
+1100%
1440p3−4
−1333%
43
+1333%
4K2−3
−1250%
27
+1250%

Cost per frame, $

1080p56.13
−1100%
4.68
+1100%
1440p149.67
−1333%
10.44
+1333%
4K224.50
−1250%
16.63
+1250%
  • RTX A2000 has 1100% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RTX A2000 has 1333% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RTX A2000 has 1250% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 84
+0%
84
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 62
+0%
62
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 108
+0%
108
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 52
+0%
52
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 98
+0%
98
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 129
+0%
129
+0%
Metro Exodus 60
+0%
60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 117
+0%
117
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45
+0%
45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 91
+0%
91
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 64
+0%
64
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 58
+0%
58
+0%
Metro Exodus 34
+0%
34
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 61
+0%
61
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 47
+0%
47
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 56
+0%
56
+0%
Metro Exodus 20
+0%
20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40
+0%
40
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6
+0%
6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

This is how GTX 260 and RTX A2000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX A2000 is 1100% faster in 1080p
  • RTX A2000 is 1333% faster in 1440p
  • RTX A2000 is 1250% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 3.14 35.35
Recency 16 June 2008 10 August 2021
Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 70 Watt

RTX A2000 has a 1025.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 585.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 712.5% more advanced lithography process, and 160% lower power consumption.

The RTX A2000 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 A2000 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 A2000
RTX A2000
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
HD 7730 Radeon HD 7730
RTX A2000 RTX A2000
vs
RTX A2000 12 GB RTX A2000 12 GB
GTX 260 GeForce GTX 260
vs
GT 1010 GeForce GT 1010
GTX 260 GeForce GTX 260
vs
256 SDR GeForce 256 SDR
GTX 260 GeForce GTX 260
vs
GMA 3150 GMA 3150
GTX 260 GeForce GTX 260
vs
GMA 900 GMA 900
GTX 260 GTX 260
vs
GTX 1650 GDDR6 GTX 1650 GDDR6
GTX 260 GeForce GTX 260
vs
UHD Graphics G4 UHD Graphics G4
GTX 260 GeForce GTX 260
vs
UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs (Rocket Lake) UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs (Rocket Lake)
GTX 260 GeForce GTX 260
vs
RX 6500 Radeon RX 6500
GTX 260 GTX 260
vs
RTX 4070 Mobile RTX 4070 Mobile
GTX 260 GeForce GTX 260
vs
RX 6550M Radeon RX 6550M
GTX 260 GeForce GTX 260
vs
RTX 6000 Ada Generation RTX 6000 Ada Generation

Community ratings

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

3.7 617 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 598 votes

Rate RTX A2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 260 or RTX A2000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.