GeForce FX 5900 vs GeForce RTX 2060
GeForce FX 5900
Popular choices:
GeForce RTX 2060
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The GeForce FX 5900 is positioned at rank #377 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce FX 5900
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 2060 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2011). The GeForce RTX 2060 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce FX 5900 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce RTX 2060 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 40225.7% higher G3D Mark score and 4700% more VRAM (6 GB vs 128 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce FX 5900.
| Insight | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-40225.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+40225.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 2 Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (6 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce RTX 2060 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $120 (vs $20), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 6621% better value per dollar than the GeForce FX 5900.
| Insight | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+6621%) |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($20) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($120) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce FX 5900 and GeForce RTX 2060
GeForce FX 5900
The GeForce FX 5900 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 24 2011. It features the Rankine architecture. The core clock speed is 607 MHz. It has 1024 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 365W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 35 points. Launch price was $699.
GeForce RTX 2060
The GeForce RTX 2060 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 7 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1365 MHz to 1680 MHz. It has 1920 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 160W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 30 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 14,114 points. Launch price was $349.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce FX 5900 scores 35 versus the GeForce RTX 2060's 14,114 — the GeForce RTX 2060 leads by 40225.7%. The GeForce FX 5900 is built on Rankine while the GeForce RTX 2060 uses Turing, both on 40 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce FX 5900) vs 1,920 (GeForce RTX 2060). Raw compute: 1.244 TFLOPS ×2 (GeForce FX 5900) vs 6.451 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 2060).
| Feature | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 35 | 14,114+40226% |
| Architecture | Rankine | Turing |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 1024 ×2 | 1920+88% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.244 TFLOPS ×2 | 6.451 TFLOPS+419% |
| ROPs | 48 ×2 | 48 |
| TMUs | 64 ×2 | 120+88% |
| L1 Cache | 1 MB | 1.9 MB+90% |
| L2 Cache | 0.75 MB | 3 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 2.0 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 / AFMF (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce FX 5900 comes with 128 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 2060 has 6 GB. The GeForce RTX 2060 offers 4700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 0.75 MB (GeForce FX 5900) vs 3 MB (GeForce RTX 2060) — the GeForce RTX 2060 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.125 GB | 6 GB+4700% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | 336 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 192-bit+50% |
| L2 Cache | 0.75 MB | 3 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 9.0a (GeForce FX 5900) vs 12 Ultimate (12_2) (GeForce RTX 2060). OpenGL: 1.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 9.0a | 12 Ultimate (12_2)+33% |
| OpenGL | 1.5 | 4.6+207% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce FX 5900 draws 365W versus the GeForce RTX 2060's 160W — a 78.1% difference. The GeForce RTX 2060 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce FX 5900) vs 500W (GeForce RTX 2060). Power connectors: Legacy vs 8-pin. Card length: 218mm vs 229mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 365W | 160W-56% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-30% | 500W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | 8-pin |
| Length | 218mm | 229mm |
| Height | — | 113mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 72 |
| Perf/Watt | 0.1 | 88.2+88100% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce FX 5900 launched at $399 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the GeForce RTX 2060 launched at $349 and now averages $120. The GeForce FX 5900 costs 83.3% less ($100 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 1.8 (GeForce FX 5900) vs 117.6 (GeForce RTX 2060) — the GeForce RTX 2060 offers 6433.3% better value. The GeForce RTX 2060 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2011).
| Feature | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $399 | $349-13% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20-83% | $120 |
| Performance per Dollar | 1.8 | 117.6+6433% |
| Codename | GF110 | TU106 |
| Release | March 24 2011 | January 7 2019 |
| Ranking | #555 | #168 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce FX 5900 and GeForce RTX 2060
