GeForce RTX 5080 vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 2600 XT
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 2600 XT with GeForce RTX 5080, including specs and performance data.
RTX 5080 outperforms ATI Mobility HD 2600 XT by a whopping 30203% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1310 | 1 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 43.62 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 19.37 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | M76 | GB203 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 14 May 2007 (17 years ago) | 30 January 2025 (recently) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $999 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 | 120 | 10752 |
| Core clock speed | 680 MHz | 2295 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2617 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 390 million | 45,600 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 360 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 5.440 | 879.3 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1632 TFLOPS | 56.28 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 128 |
| TMUs | 8 | 336 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 336 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 84 |
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 |
| Interface | MXM-II | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 304 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 16-pin |
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 | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 750 MHz | 1875 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 24 GB/s | 960.0 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 | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |
| HDMI | - | + |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.0 (10_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |
| CUDA | - | 10.1 |
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 | 0−1 | 193 |
| 1440p | 0−1 | 154 |
| 4K | -0−1 | 102 |
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 5.18 |
| 1440p | no data | 6.49 |
| 4K | no data | 9.79 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−3500%
|
210−220
+3500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−29900%
|
900−950
+29900%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−3500%
|
210−220
+3500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−29900%
|
900−950
+29900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−29900%
|
1800−1850
+29900%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
−3800%
|
150−160
+3800%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−3500%
|
210−220
+3500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−29900%
|
900−950
+29900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−2143%
|
157
+2143%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−29900%
|
1800−1850
+29900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−2971%
|
210−220
+2971%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
−3800%
|
150−160
+3800%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−3380%
|
170−180
+3380%
|
| World of Tanks | 12−14
−2046%
|
270−280
+2046%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−3600%
|
222
+3600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−29900%
|
900−950
+29900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−2943%
|
210−220
+2943%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−29900%
|
1800−1850
+29900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−2971%
|
210−220
+2971%
|
1440p
High Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−29900%
|
600−650
+29900%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−29900%
|
900−950
+29900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−3900%
|
160−170
+3900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−29900%
|
1200−1250
+29900%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−14200%
|
550−600
+14200%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−1717%
|
109
+1717%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−1147%
|
180−190
+1147%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−29900%
|
4500−4550
+29900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−20800%
|
200−210
+20800%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−29900%
|
4500−4550
+29900%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 90−95 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−500%
|
36
+500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−29900%
|
600−650
+29900%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−29900%
|
4500−4550
+29900%
|
| Valorant | 0−1 | 350−400 |
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Valorant | 800−850
+0%
|
800−850
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Valorant | 800−850
+0%
|
800−850
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
| Valorant | 800−850
+0%
|
800−850
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| World of Tanks | 500−550
+0%
|
500−550
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 230−240
+0%
|
230−240
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Metro Exodus | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 5080 is 20800% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 5080 is ahead in 18 tests (43%)
- there's a draw in 24 tests (57%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.33 | 100.00 |
| Recency | 14 May 2007 | 30 January 2025 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 16 GB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 4 nm |
RTX 5080 has a 30203% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1525% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 5080 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 2600 XT in performance tests.
Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 2600 XT is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 5080 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
