GeForce GTX 260 216 vs Radeon RX Vega 56
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 200 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 18.17 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 11.40 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) |
| GPU code name | Vega 10 | GT200 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 14 August 2017 (8 years ago) | 16 September 2008 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $399 | $299 |
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 | 3584 | 216 |
| Core clock speed | 1156 MHz | 576 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1471 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 12,500 million | 1,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 210 Watt | 182 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 329.5 | 41.47 |
| Floating-point processing power | 10.54 TFLOPS | 0.5365 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 28 |
| TMUs | 224 | 72 |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 224 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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 267 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 8-pin | 2x 6-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 | HBM2 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 896 MB |
| Memory bus width | 2048 Bit | 448 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 999 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 409.6 GB/s | 111.9 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 | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.125 | N/A |
| CUDA | - | 1.3 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 14 August 2017 | 16 September 2008 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 896 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 210 Watt | 182 Watt |
RX Vega 56 has an age advantage of 8 years, a 814% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 364% more advanced lithography process.
GTX 260 216, on the other hand, has 15% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 56 and GeForce GTX 260 Core 216. We've got no test results to judge.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
