GeForce GTS 260M vs Quadro P2000
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 346 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.86 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 17.79 | no data |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) |
| GPU code name | GP106 | GT215 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 6 February 2017 (8 years ago) | 15 June 2009 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $585 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 1024 | 96 |
| Core clock speed | 1076 MHz | 550 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1480 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 4,400 million | 727 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 38 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 94.72 | 17.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 3.031 TFLOPS | 0.264 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | no data | 396 |
| ROPs | 40 | 8 |
| TMUs | 64 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 384 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 1280 KB | 64 KB |
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 | no data | large |
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 201 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
| SLI options | - | + |
| MXM Type | no data | MXM 3.0 Type-B |
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 | 5 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 160 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1752 MHz | Up to 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 140.2 GB/s | 57.6 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 4x DisplayPort | HDMIVGADual Link DVIDisplayPortSingle Link DVILVDS |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | no data | 8.0 |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 11.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | + | N/A |
| CUDA | 6.1 | + |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 6 February 2017 | 15 June 2009 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 5 GB | 1 GB |
| Chip lithography | 16 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 38 Watt |
Quadro P2000 has an age advantage of 7 years, a 400% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.
GTS 260M, on the other hand, has 97.4% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Quadro P2000 and GeForce GTS 260M. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Quadro P2000 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTS 260M is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
