GeForce GTX 260 vs GeForce 830A
GeForce GTX 260
Popular choices:
GeForce 830A
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. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce GTX 260 is positioned at rank 293 and the GeForce 830A is on rank 344, so the GeForce GTX 260 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 260
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 830A
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 830A is significantly newer (2014 vs 2008). The GeForce 830A likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 260 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 260 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.3% higher G3D Mark score and 75% more VRAM (896 MB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 830A.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+75%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 830A offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce 830A holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $449), it costs 93% less, resulting in a 1363% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1363%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($449) | ✅More affordable ($30) |
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 GTX 260 and GeForce 830A
GeForce GTX 260
The GeForce GTX 260 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 16 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 576 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 182W. Manufactured using 65 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,200 points. Launch price was $449.
GeForce 830A
The GeForce 830A is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 22 2014. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1082 MHz to 1150 MHz. It has 256 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,173 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 260 scores 1,200 and the GeForce 830A reaches 1,173 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 260 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the GeForce 830A uses Maxwell, both on 65 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 192 (GeForce GTX 260) vs 256 (GeForce 830A). Raw compute: 0.4769 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 260) vs 0.5888 TFLOPS (GeForce 830A).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,200+2% | 1,173 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 65 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 256+33% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.4769 TFLOPS | 0.5888 TFLOPS+23% |
| ROPs | 28+250% | 8 |
| TMUs | 64+300% | 16 |
| L2 Cache | 0.22 MB | 1 MB+355% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 260 comes with 896 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce 830A has 512 MB. The GeForce GTX 260 offers 75% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.22 MB (GeForce GTX 260) vs 1 MB (GeForce 830A) — the GeForce 830A has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.875 GB+75% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.22 MB | 1 MB+355% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10_0 (GeForce GTX 260) vs 12 (11_0) (GeForce 830A). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10_0 | 12 (11_0)+20% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st Gen (GeForce GTX 260) vs NVENC 3.0 (GeForce 830A). Decoder: NVDEC 1st Gen vs VP6. Supported codecs: H.264 (GeForce GTX 260) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce 830A).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 1st Gen | NVENC 3.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 1st Gen | VP6 |
| Codecs | H.264 | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 260 draws 182W versus the GeForce 830A's 33W — a 138.6% difference. The GeForce 830A is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (GeForce GTX 260) vs 350W (GeForce 830A). Power connectors: 2x 6-pin vs Legacy. Card length: 267mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 182W | 33W-82% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 350W-30% |
| Power Connector | 2x 6-pin | Legacy |
| Length | 267mm | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | — | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 6.6 | 35.5+438% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 260 launched at $449 MSRP and currently averages $449, while the GeForce 830A launched at $100 and now averages $30. The GeForce 830A costs 93.3% less ($419 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 2.7 (GeForce GTX 260) vs 39.1 (GeForce 830A) — the GeForce 830A offers 1348.1% better value. The GeForce 830A is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $449 | $100-78% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $449 | $30-93% |
| Performance per Dollar | 2.7 | 39.1+1348% |
| Codename | GT200 | GM108 |
| Release | June 16 2008 | July 22 2014 |
| Ranking | #821 | #832 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 260 and GeForce 830A
