CPU
GPU
GeForce GTX 260
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 295
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 GTX 295 is on rank 301, 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 GTX 295
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 260 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce GTX 295 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2009 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 295 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 295 holds the technical lead. Priced at $50 (vs $449), it costs 89% less, resulting in a 796.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+796.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($449) | ✅More affordable ($50) |
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 GTX 295
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 GTX 295
The GeForce GTX 295 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 8 2009. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 576 MHz. It has 480 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 289W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,198 points. Launch price was $500.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 260 scores 1,200 and the GeForce GTX 295 reaches 1,198 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 260 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 295 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 65 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 192 (GeForce GTX 260) vs 480 (GeForce GTX 295). Raw compute: 0.4769 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 260) vs 0.5962 TFLOPS ×2 (GeForce GTX 295).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,200 | 1,198 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 65 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 480 ×2+150% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.4769 TFLOPS | 0.5962 TFLOPS ×2+25% |
| ROPs | 28 | 28 ×2 |
| TMUs | 64 | 80 ×2+25% |
| L2 Cache | 224 KB | 224 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 260 comes with 896 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 295 has 2 GB. The GeForce GTX 295 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.875 GB | 1.75 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 224 KB | 224 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10_0 (GeForce GTX 260) vs 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce GTX 295). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10_0 | 11.1 (10_0)+11% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st Gen (GeForce GTX 260) vs PureVideo HD VP2 (GeForce GTX 295). Decoder: NVDEC 1st Gen vs PureVideo HD VP2. Supported codecs: H.264 (GeForce GTX 260) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 295).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 1st Gen | PureVideo HD VP2 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 1st Gen | PureVideo HD VP2 |
| Codecs | H.264 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 260 draws 182W versus the GeForce GTX 295's 289W — a 45.4% difference. The GeForce GTX 260 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (GeForce GTX 260) vs 680W (GeForce GTX 295). Power connectors: 2x 6-pin vs 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin. Card length: 267mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 182W-37% | 289W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W-26% | 680W |
| Power Connector | 2x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| Length | 267mm | 267mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 95°C |
| Perf/Watt | 6.6+61% | 4.1 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 260 launched at $449 MSRP and currently averages $449, while the GeForce GTX 295 launched at $499 and now averages $50. The GeForce GTX 295 costs 88.9% less ($399 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 2.7 (GeForce GTX 260) vs 24.0 (GeForce GTX 295) — the GeForce GTX 295 offers 788.9% better value. The GeForce GTX 295 is the newer GPU (2009 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $449-10% | $499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $449 | $50-89% |
| Performance per Dollar | 2.7 | 24.0+789% |
| Codename | GT200 | GT200B |
| Release | June 16 2008 | January 8 2009 |
| Ranking | #821 | #816 |
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 GTX 295
