GeForce RTX 4070 vs GTX 260M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 260M with GeForce RTX 4070, including specs and performance data.

GTX 260M
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 75 Watt
0.98

RTX 4070 outperforms GTX 260M by a whopping 7029% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking107317
Place by popularitynot in top-10031
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.0726.90
ArchitectureG9x (2007−2010)Ada Lovelace
GPU code nameN10E-GTAD104
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date2 March 2009 (15 years ago)13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$599
Current price$109 $791 (1.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 4070 has 38329% better value for money than GTX 260M.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1125888
CUDA cores112no data
Core clock speed550 MHz1920 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2475 MHz
Number of transistors754 million35,800 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt200 Watt
Texture fill rate31 billion/sec455.4
Floating-point performance308 gflopsno data
Gigaflops462no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 260M and GeForce RTX 4070 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data240 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 16-pin
SLI options2-wayno data
MXM TypeMXM 3.0 Type-Bno 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 typeGDDR3GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount1 GB12 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 950 MHz21000 MHz
Memory bandwidth61 GB/s504.2 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 ConnectorsDisplayPortSingle Link DVIDual Link DVIVGALVDSHDMI1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.7
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+8.9

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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
RTX 4070 69.86
+7029%

RTX 4070 outperforms GTX 260M by 7029% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 260M 379
RTX 4070 26979
+7018%

RTX 4070 outperforms GTX 260M by 7018% in Passmark.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 260M 4901
RTX 4070 128530
+2523%

RTX 4070 outperforms GTX 260M by 2523% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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 HD25
−728%
207
+728%
1440p1−2
−12100%
122
+12100%
4K1−2
−7200%
73
+7200%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 no data
Far Cry 5 1−2 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 no data
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 no data
Hitman 3 3−4 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 no data
Far Cry 5 1−2 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 no data
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 no data
Hitman 3 3−4 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 no data
Far Cry 5 1−2 no data
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11 no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 no data
Far Cry 5 1−2 no data
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 no data
Hitman 3 7−8 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 no data

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2 no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 no data
Far Cry 5 0−1 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2 no data
Metro Exodus 4−5 no data

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 120−130
−7014%
8750−8800
+7014%
Battlefield 5 220−230
−7008%
15850−15900
+7008%
Metro Exodus 140−150
−7018%
10250−10300
+7018%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 120−130
−7014%
8750−8800
+7014%
Battlefield 5 220−230
−7008%
15850−15900
+7008%
Metro Exodus 84
−6983%
5950−6000
+6983%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 120−130
−7014%
8750−8800
+7014%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 85−90
−7026%
6200−6250
+7026%
Metro Exodus 143
−6998%
10150−10200
+6998%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 222
−7017%
15800−15850
+7017%
Watch Dogs: Legion 93
−6997%
6600−6650
+6997%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
−7002%
6250−6300
+7002%
Hitman 3 60−65
−6949%
4300−4350
+6949%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 84
−6983%
5950−6000
+6983%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 115
−6987%
8150−8200
+6987%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 36
−6983%
2550−2600
+6983%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
−7007%
8600−8650
+7007%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50
−7000%
3550−3600
+7000%

This is how GTX 260M and RTX 4070 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4070 is 728% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4070 is 12100% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 4070 is 7200% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.98 69.86
Recency 2 March 2009 13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 200 Watt

The GeForce RTX 4070 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 260M is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 4070 is a desktop 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 260M
GeForce GTX 260M
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070
GeForce RTX 4070

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.


3.4 14 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 7669 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4070 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.