GRID K260Q vs GeForce GTX 550 Ti

Place in the ranking	693	523
Place by popularity	73	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.79	0.91
Power efficiency	2.42	2.37
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	GF116	GK104
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	15 March 2011 (13 years ago)	28 June 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$149	$937

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GRID K260Q has 15% better value for money than GTX 550 Ti.

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	192	1536
Core clock speed	900 MHz	745 MHz
Number of transistors	1,170 million	3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	116 Watt	225 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	100 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	28.80	95.36
Floating-point processing power	0.6912 TFLOPS	2.289 TFLOPS
ROPs	24	32
TMUs	32	128

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).

Bus support	16x PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	210 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	IGP
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no data
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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	4.1 GB/s	1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	98.4 GB/s	160.0 GB/s

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	Two Dual Link DVI-IMini HDMI	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.2	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.1.126
CUDA	+	3.0

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 550 Ti 4.03

GRID K260Q 7.64
+89.6%

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 550 Ti 1553

GRID K260Q 2949
+89.9%

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:

900p	38 −84.2%	70−75 +84.2%
Full HD	38 −84.2%	70−75 +84.2%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

3.92

13.39

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

7−8
−71.4%

12−14

+71.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 −63.6%	18−20 +63.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Battlefield 5	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −71.4%	12−14 +71.4%
Far Cry 5	8−9 −75%	14−16 +75%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 −63.6%	18−20 +63.6%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −87.5%	45−50 +87.5%
Hitman 3	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −85.2%	50−55 +85.2%
Metro Exodus	8−9 −75%	14−16 +75%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −80%	18−20 +80%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 −80%	27−30 +80%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −86%	80−85 +86%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 −63.6%	18−20 +63.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Battlefield 5	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −71.4%	12−14 +71.4%
Far Cry 5	8−9 −75%	14−16 +75%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 −63.6%	18−20 +63.6%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −87.5%	45−50 +87.5%
Hitman 3	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −85.2%	50−55 +85.2%
Metro Exodus	8−9 −75%	14−16 +75%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −80%	18−20 +80%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 −80%	27−30 +80%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −87.5%	30−33 +87.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −86%	80−85 +86%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 −63.6%	18−20 +63.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −71.4%	12−14 +71.4%
Far Cry 5	8−9 −75%	14−16 +75%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −87.5%	45−50 +87.5%
Hitman 3	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −85.2%	50−55 +85.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 −80%	27−30 +80%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −87.5%	30−33 +87.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −86%	80−85 +86%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11

−80%

18−20
+80%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −71.4%	12−14 +71.4%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −80%	9−10 +80%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −80%	9−10 +80%
Hitman 3	8−9 −75%	14−16 +75%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 −80%	45−50 +80%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
−75%

14−16

+75%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Hitman 3	0−1	0−1
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

−80%

9−10
+80%

This is how GTX 550 Ti and GRID K260Q compete in popular games:

GRID K260Q is 84% faster in 900p
GRID K260Q is 84% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.03	7.64
Recency	15 March 2011	28 June 2013
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	116 Watt	225 Watt

GTX 550 Ti has 94% lower power consumption.

GRID K260Q, on the other hand, has a 89.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The GRID K260Q is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 550 Ti in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 550 Ti is a desktop card while GRID K260Q is a workstation one.

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