GeForce GTX 260 vs GTX 260M SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 260M SLI with GeForce GTX 260, including specs and performance data.
GTX 260M SLI outperforms GTX 260 by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 741 | 751 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.16 |
Power efficiency | 1.50 | 1.19 |
Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) |
GPU code name | NB9E-GTX | GT200 |
Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
Release date | 2 March 2009 (15 years ago) | 16 June 2008 (16 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $449 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 cores | 224 | 192 |
Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 576 MHz |
Number of transistors | 1508 Million | 1,400 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 65 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 182 Watt |
Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 105 °C |
Texture fill rate | no data | 36.86 |
Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.4769 TFLOPS |
ROPs | no data | 28 |
TMUs | no data | 64 |
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).
Laptop size | large | no data |
Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | no data | 267 mm |
Height | no data | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) |
Width | no data | 2-slot |
Supplementary power connectors | no data | 2x 6-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 type | GDDR3 | GDDR3 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 896 MB |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 448 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 950 MHz | 999 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | no data | 111.9 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 Connectors | no data | Dual Link DVIHDTV |
Multi monitor support | no data | + |
HDMI | - | + |
Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
Audio input for HDMI | no data | S/PDIF |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 10 | 11.1 (10_0) |
Shader Model | no data | 4.0 |
OpenGL | no data | 2.1 |
OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
Vulkan | - | N/A |
CUDA | + | + |
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 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Battlefield 5 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
Hitman 3 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
Metro Exodus | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 40−45
+14.3%
|
35−40
−14.3%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Battlefield 5 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
Hitman 3 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
Metro Exodus | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 40−45
+14.3%
|
35−40
−14.3%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
Hitman 3 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 40−45
+14.3%
|
35−40
−14.3%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
1440p
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Hitman 3 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
4K
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Far Cry New Dawn | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Watch Dogs: Legion | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 3.29 | 3.15 |
Recency | 2 March 2009 | 16 June 2008 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 896 MB |
Chip lithography | 55 nm | 65 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 182 Watt |
GTX 260M SLI has a 4.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 months, a 128.6% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 18.2% more advanced lithography process, and 21.3% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 260M SLI and GeForce GTX 260.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 260M SLI is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 260 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.