GeForce GTX 260M vs GeForce RTX 4070
GeForce GTX 260M
Popular choices:
GeForce RTX 4070
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 GTX 260M is positioned at rank #134 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 GTX 260M
Performance Per Dollar GeForce RTX 4070
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 4070 is significantly newer (2023 vs 2008). The GeForce RTX 4070 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 260M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce RTX 4070 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 6946.9% higher G3D Mark score and 1100% more VRAM (12 GB vs 1 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 260M.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-6946.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+6946.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🏆Elite Architecture (Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) / 5nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (12 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | Standard Size (304mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce RTX 4070 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 RTX 4070
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 RTX 4070
The GeForce RTX 4070 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 12 2023. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 1920 MHz to 2475 MHz. It has 5888 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 26,919 points. Launch price was $599.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 260M scores 382 versus the GeForce RTX 4070's 26,919 — the GeForce RTX 4070 leads by 6946.9%. The GeForce GTX 260M is built on Tesla 2.0 while the GeForce RTX 4070 uses Ada Lovelace, both on 65 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 192 (GeForce GTX 260M) vs 5,888 (GeForce RTX 4070). Raw compute: 0.4769 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 260M) vs 29.15 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4070).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 382 | 26,919+6947% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Ada Lovelace |
| Process Node | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 5888+2967% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.4769 TFLOPS | 29.15 TFLOPS+6012% |
| ROPs | 28 | 64+129% |
| TMUs | 64 | 184+188% |
| L2 Cache | 0.22 MB | 36 MB+16264% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the GeForce RTX 4070 is support for DLSS 3 Frame Gen. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The GeForce GTX 260M lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | DLSS 3.5 |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | DLSS 3.0 (Native) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | Yes (DLSS 3.5) |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 260M comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 4070 has 12 GB. The GeForce RTX 4070 offers 1100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 0.22 MB (GeForce GTX 260M) vs 36 MB (GeForce RTX 4070) — the GeForce RTX 4070 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 12 GB+1100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6X |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | 504 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 192-bit+50% |
| L2 Cache | 0.22 MB | 36 MB+16264% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce GTX 260M) vs 12.2 (GeForce RTX 4070). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12.2+10% |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6+39% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: PureVideo HD VP2 (GeForce GTX 260M) vs 8th Gen NVENC (2x) (GeForce RTX 4070). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP2 vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 260M) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (GeForce RTX 4070).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | PureVideo HD VP2 | 8th Gen NVENC (2x) |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP2 | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 260M draws 182W versus the GeForce RTX 4070's 200W — a 9.4% difference. The GeForce GTX 260M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 260M) vs 650W (GeForce RTX 4070). Power connectors: None vs 8-pin. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 182W-9% | 200W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-46% | 650W |
| Power Connector | None | 8-pin |
| Length | — | 304mm |
| Height | — | 137mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 3 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 80°C-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 2.1 | 134.6+6310% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 4070 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 260M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $599 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $550 |
| Codename | GT200 | AD104 |
| Release | June 16 2008 | April 12 2023 |
| Ranking | #821 | #32 |
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 RTX 4070
