GeForce GTX 260M SLI vs Quadro M1000M

Place in the ranking	529	742
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.89	no data
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2018)	G9x (2007−2010)
GPU code name	GM107	NB9E-GTX
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	2 October 2015 (8 years ago)	2 March 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$200.89	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	512	224
Core clock speed	993 MHz	550 MHz
Boost clock speed	1072 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,870 million	1508 Million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	150 Watt
Texture fill rate	31.78	no data
Floating-point processing power	1.017 gflops	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	32	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	large
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB/4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	5000 MHz	950 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80 GB/s	no data
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	no data
Display Port	1.2	no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	-
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	10
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.5	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	+	-
CUDA	5.0	+

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	37 +131%	16−18 −131%
4K	13 +160%	5−6 −160%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

12−14
+100%

6−7

−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +90%	10−11 −90%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Battlefield 5	21−24 +267%	6−7 −267%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 +133%	9−10 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +188%	16−18 −188%
Hitman 3	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +87%	21−24 −87%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +425%	4−5 −425%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +150%	8−9 −150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +92.3%	12−14 −92.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +37.5%	40−45 −37.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +90%	10−11 −90%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Battlefield 5	21−24 +267%	6−7 −267%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 +133%	9−10 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +188%	16−18 −188%
Hitman 3	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +87%	21−24 −87%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +425%	4−5 −425%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +150%	8−9 −150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +92.3%	12−14 −92.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	62 +343%	14−16 −343%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +37.5%	40−45 −37.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +90%	10−11 −90%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +114%	7−8 −114%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +188%	16−18 −188%
Hitman 3	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +87%	21−24 −87%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +92.3%	12−14 −92.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	11 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +37.5%	40−45 −37.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

20−22
+150%

8−9

−150%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 +120%	5−6 −120%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +125%	12−14 −125%
Hitman 3	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
Metro Exodus	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +147%	18−20 −147%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14
+85.7%

7−8

−85.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Hitman 3	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 +150%	10−11 −150%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7 +133%	3−4 −133%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+75%

4−5

−75%

This is how M1000M and GTX 260M SLI compete in popular games:

M1000M is 131% faster in 1080p
M1000M is 160% faster in 4K

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

in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the M1000M is 900% faster.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 260M SLI is 27% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

M1000M is ahead in 61 test (98%)
GTX 260M SLI is ahead in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.42	3.30
Recency	2 October 2015	2 March 2009
Chip lithography	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	150 Watt

M1000M has a 124.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 275% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M1000M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M1000M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 260M SLI is a mobile workstation one.

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