GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER vs GTX 260M

Place in performance ranking	1113	7
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	55.64
Architecture	G9x (2007−2010)	Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code name	N10E-GT	AD103-275
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	2 March 2009 (15 years ago)	24 January 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores	112	8448
CUDA cores	112	no data
Core clock speed	550 MHz	2340 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2610 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	45,900 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	285 Watt
Texture fill rate	30.80	689.0
Floating-point performance	0.308 gflops	no data
Gigaflops	462	no data

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 4.0 x16
Length	no data	310 mm
Width	no data	3-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 16-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	GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	Up to 950 MHz	21000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	61 GB/s	716.8 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	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
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 compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.0	6.7
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
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 Ti SUPER 82.10
+8278%

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.

GTX 260M 379

RTX 4070 Ti SUPER 31683
+8260%

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	27 −741%	227 +741%
1440p	1−2 −14300%	144 +14300%
4K	1−2 −9800%	99 +9800%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4
−8233%

250−260

+8233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −3260%	160−170 +3260%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −2900%	120−130 +2900%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −8233%	250−260 +8233%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −11700%	110−120 +11700%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −9950%	200−210 +9950%
Hitman 3	5−6 −2480%	120−130 +2480%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −2138%	290−300 +2138%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −12300%	120−130 +12300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −5043%	350−400 +5043%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −381%	150−160 +381%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −3260%	160−170 +3260%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −2900%	120−130 +2900%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −8233%	250−260 +8233%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −11700%	110−120 +11700%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −9950%	200−210 +9950%
Hitman 3	5−6 −2480%	120−130 +2480%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −2138%	290−300 +2138%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −12300%	120−130 +12300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −6214%	442 +6214%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −1730%	180−190 +1730%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −381%	150−160 +381%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −3260%	160−170 +3260%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −2900%	120−130 +2900%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −8233%	250−260 +8233%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −11700%	110−120 +11700%
Hitman 3	5−6 −2480%	120−130 +2480%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −2138%	290−300 +2138%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −5714%	407 +5714%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −2000%	210 +2000%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −350%	144 +350%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

1−2

−12300%

120−130
+12300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −16500%	160−170 +16500%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −11100%	110−120 +11100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −9800%	95−100 +9800%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −7900%	80−85 +7900%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −8300%	80−85 +8300%
Hitman 3	7−8 −1614%	120−130 +1614%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 −5450%	220−230 +5450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	159
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −5900%	240−250 +5900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−4100%

120−130
+4100%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

0−1

65−70

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −7100%	70−75 +7100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	65−70
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	50−55
Far Cry 5	0−1	50−55

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−4850%

95−100
+4850%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Battlefield 5	240−250 +0%	240−250 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	250−260 +0%	250−260 +0%
Metro Exodus	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Battlefield 5	240−250 +0%	240−250 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	250−260 +0%	250−260 +0%
Metro Exodus	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	250−260 +0%	250−260 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Metro Exodus	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	306 +0%	306 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Hitman 3	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	162 +0%	162 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	69 +0%	69 +0%

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

RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is 741% faster in 1080p
RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is 14300% faster in 1440p
RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is 9800% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is 16500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is ahead in 38 tests (62%)
there's a draw in 23 tests (38%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.98	82.10
Recency	2 March 2009	24 January 2024
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	285 Watt

GTX 260M has 280% lower power consumption.

RTX 4070 Ti SUPER, on the other hand, has a 8277.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1000% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER 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 Ti SUPER is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.