GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile vs GTX 260M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 260M and GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RTX 3050 Ti Mobile outperforms 260M by a whopping 2553% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1171 | 261 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 71 |
| Power efficiency | 1.07 | 24.56 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | G92 | GA106 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 3 March 2009 (16 years ago) | 11 May 2021 (4 years ago) |
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 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 735 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1035 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 754 million | 13,250 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 30.80 | 82.80 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.308 TFLOPS | 5.299 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | 462 | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 48 |
| TMUs | 56 | 80 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 80 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 20 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 2.5 MB |
| L2 Cache | 64 KB | 2 MB |
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 | large |
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| 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 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 950 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 61 GB/s | 192.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | DisplayPortSingle Link DVIDual Link DVIVGALVDSHDMI | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | no data |
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 and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
| CUDA | + | 8.6 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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 | 29
−155%
| 74
+155%
|
| 1440p | 1−2
−4100%
| 42
+4100%
|
| 4K | 0−1 | 26 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−3000%
|
62
+3000%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−1180%
|
64
+1180%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−2850%
|
59
+2850%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−7800%
|
79
+7800%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−11900%
|
120−130
+11900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1517%
|
95−100
+1517%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 94 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−900%
|
50
+900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−978%
|
95−100
+978%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−442%
|
160−170
+442%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
−1026%
|
250−260
+1026%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−2150%
|
45
+2150%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−743%
|
118
+743%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−7300%
|
74
+7300%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−11900%
|
120−130
+11900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1517%
|
95−100
+1517%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 84 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−700%
|
40
+700%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−5600%
|
57
+5600%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−978%
|
95−100
+978%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−1433%
|
92
+1433%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−442%
|
160−170
+442%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−1900%
|
40
+1900%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−707%
|
113
+707%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−6700%
|
68
+6700%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1517%
|
95−100
+1517%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−560%
|
33
+560%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−978%
|
95−100
+978%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−733%
|
50
+733%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−261%
|
112
+261%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−11900%
|
120−130
+11900%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−1667%
|
50−55
+1667%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 5−6
−3380%
|
170−180
+3380%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−1844%
|
170−180
+1844%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 22 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 50 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−2000%
|
60−65
+2000%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2
−2400%
|
25
+2400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−3900%
|
40−45
+3900%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−5800%
|
55−60
+5800%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−193%
|
44
+193%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−2780%
|
140−150
+2780%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−1200%
|
24−27
+1200%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 108
+0%
|
108
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 98
+0%
|
98
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 94
+0%
|
94
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 89
+0%
|
89
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 41
+0%
|
41
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 34
+0%
|
34
+0%
|
| Valorant | 200−210
+0%
|
200−210
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 69
+0%
|
69
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21
+0%
|
21
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 29
+0%
|
29
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 38
+0%
|
38
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10
+0%
|
10
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 54
+0%
|
54
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21
+0%
|
21
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
This is how GTX 260M and RTX 3050 Ti Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is 155% faster in 1080p
- RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is 4100% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is 11900% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 3050 Ti Mobile performs better in 40 tests (65%)
- there's a draw in 22 tests (35%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.86 | 22.82 |
| Recency | 3 March 2009 | 11 May 2021 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 75 Watt |
GTX 260M has 15.4% lower power consumption.
RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, on the other hand, has a 2553.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 712.5% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
