Radeon Pro WX 3200 vs GeForce GTX 260

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 260 with Radeon Pro WX 3200, including specs and performance data.

GTX 260
2008
896 MB GDDR3, 182 Watt
3.15

Pro WX 3200 outperforms GTX 260 by an impressive 99% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking751578
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1612.41
Power efficiency1.196.61
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGT200Polaris 23
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date16 June 2008 (16 years ago)2 July 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 $199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Pro WX 3200 has 7656% 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 cores192640
Core clock speed576 MHz1082 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt65 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate36.8634.62
Floating-point processing power0.4769 TFLOPS1.385 TFLOPS
ROPs2816
TMUs6432

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 3.0 x8
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotMXM Module
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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount896 MB4 GB
Memory bus width448 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/s64 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVIHDTV4x mini-DisplayPort
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA+-

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
Pro WX 3200 6.27
+99%

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
Pro WX 3200 2414
+98.7%

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 HD10−12
−100%
20
+100%
4K4−5
−100%
8
+100%

Cost per frame, $

1080p44.909.95
4K112.2524.88

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 24
+0%
24
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 14
+0%
14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+0%
10
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
+0%
5
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how GTX 260 and Pro WX 3200 compete in popular games:

  • Pro WX 3200 is 100% faster in 1080p
  • Pro WX 3200 is 100% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 71 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.15 6.27
Recency 16 June 2008 2 July 2019
Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 65 Watt

Pro WX 3200 has a 99% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 357.1% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 180% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro WX 3200 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 Radeon Pro WX 3200 is a 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
AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
Radeon Pro WX 3200

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.


3.8 606 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 84 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 3200 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.