GeForce GTX 260 vs GTX 260M

Place in the ranking	1109	749
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.14
Power efficiency	1.05	1.21
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	G92	GT200
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	3 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.

no data

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	112	192
Core clock speed	550 MHz	576 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	182 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105 °C
Texture fill rate	30.80	36.86
Floating-point processing power	0.308 TFLOPS	0.4769 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	462	no data
ROPs	16	28
TMUs	56	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
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	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	2-way	+
MXM Type	MXM 3.0 Type-B	no data

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	1 GB	896 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	448 Bit
Memory clock speed	Up to 950 MHz	999 MHz
Memory bandwidth	61 GB/s	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	DisplayPortSingle Link DVIDual Link DVIVGALVDSHDMI	Dual Link DVIHDTV
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	S/PDIF

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power management

8.0

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	4.0	4.0
OpenGL	2.1	2.1
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
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 260M 0.98

GTX 260 3.15
+221%

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 260M 379

GTX 260 1215
+221%

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 HD

−210%

90−95
+210%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

4.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−200%

9−10
+200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −220%	16−18 +220%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
Hitman 3	5−6 −220%	16−18 +220%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −208%	40−45 +208%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −200%	21−24 +200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −213%	100−105 +213%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −220%	16−18 +220%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
Hitman 3	5−6 −220%	16−18 +220%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −208%	40−45 +208%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −200%	21−24 +200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −213%	100−105 +213%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −220%	16−18 +220%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Hitman 3	5−6 −220%	16−18 +220%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −208%	40−45 +208%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −200%	21−24 +200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −200%	30−33 +200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −213%	100−105 +213%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

1−2

−200%

3−4
+200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Hitman 3	7−8 −200%	21−24 +200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%