CPU
GPU
GeForce GTX 260M
Popular choices:
GeForce 7900 GTX
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 260M is positioned at rank 134 and the GeForce 7900 GTX is on rank 711, so the GeForce GTX 260M 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 260M
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 7900 GTX
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 7900 GTX is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.6% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce GTX 260M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce 7900 GTX |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / G9x (2007−2010)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce 7900 GTX remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 260M and GeForce 7900 GTX
GeForce GTX 260M
The GeForce GTX 260M 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: 382 points. Launch price was $449.
GeForce 7900 GTX
The GeForce 7900 GTX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 15 2008. It features the G9x architecture. The core clock speed is 500 MHz. It has 224 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 65 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 388 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 260M scores 382 and the GeForce 7900 GTX reaches 388 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 260M is built on Tesla 2.0 while the GeForce 7900 GTX uses G9x, both on a 65 nm process. Shader units: 192 (GeForce GTX 260M) vs 224 (GeForce 7900 GTX).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce 7900 GTX |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 382 | 388+2% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | G9x |
| Process Node | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 224+17% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce 7900 GTX |
|---|---|---|
| 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 260M comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce 7900 GTX has 512 MB. The GeForce GTX 260M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce 7900 GTX |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB+100% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce GTX 260M) vs 9.0c (GeForce 7900 GTX). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 2.1. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce 7900 GTX |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0)+23% | 9.0c |
| OpenGL | 3.3+57% | 2.1 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: PureVideo HD VP2 (GeForce GTX 260M) vs None (GeForce 7900 GTX). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP2 vs PureVideo VP1. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 260M) vs MPEG-2,WMV9,H.264 (GeForce 7900 GTX).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce 7900 GTX |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | PureVideo HD VP2 | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP2 | PureVideo VP1 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | MPEG-2,WMV9,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 260M draws 182W versus the GeForce 7900 GTX's 150W — a 19.3% difference. The GeForce 7900 GTX is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 260M) vs 350W (GeForce 7900 GTX). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 80.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce 7900 GTX |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 182W | 150W-18% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 229mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 80-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 2.1 | 2.6+24% |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 260M and GeForce 7900 GTX
