GeForce PCX 5300 vs GeForce 256
GeForce PCX 5300
Popular choices:
GeForce 256
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 PCX 5300 is positioned at rank 376 and the GeForce 256 is on rank 750, so the GeForce PCX 5300 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce PCX 5300
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 256
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce PCX 5300 is significantly newer (2025 vs 2019). The GeForce PCX 5300 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 256 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce PCX 5300 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 20% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce 256 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce PCX 5300 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+20%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-20%) |
| Longevity | Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026) (5nm) | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce PCX 5300 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $15 versus $20 for the GeForce 256, it costs 25% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 60% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce PCX 5300 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+60%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($15) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($20) |
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 PCX 5300 and GeForce 256
GeForce PCX 5300
The GeForce PCX 5300 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 30 2025. It features the Blackwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2017 MHz to 2407 MHz. It has 21760 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 575W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 170 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6 points. Launch price was $1,999.
GeForce 256
The GeForce 256 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 20 2019. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 937 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 10W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce PCX 5300 scores 6 versus the GeForce 256's 5 — the GeForce PCX 5300 leads by 20%. The GeForce PCX 5300 is built on Blackwell 2.0 while the GeForce 256 uses Pascal, both on 5 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 21,760 (GeForce PCX 5300) vs 384 (GeForce 256). Raw compute: 104.8 TFLOPS (GeForce PCX 5300) vs 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce 256). Boost clocks: 2407 MHz vs 1038 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5300 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6+20% | 5 |
| Architecture | Blackwell 2.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 21760+5567% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 104.8 TFLOPS+13046% | 0.7972 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2407 MHz+132% | 1038 MHz |
| ROPs | 176+1000% | 16 |
| TMUs | 680+2733% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 21.3 MB+15114% | 0.14 MB |
| L2 Cache | 96 MB+19100% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5300 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce PCX 5300 comes with 128 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce 256 has 512 MB. The GeForce 256 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 96 MB (GeForce PCX 5300) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce 256) — the GeForce PCX 5300 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5300 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.125 GB | 0.5 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 96 MB+19100% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 9.0a (GeForce PCX 5300) vs 7.0 (GeForce 256). OpenGL: 1.5 vs 1.2. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 1.
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5300 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 9.0a+29% | 7.0 |
| OpenGL | 1.5+25% | 1.2 |
| Max Displays | 2+100% | 1 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce PCX 5300) vs None (GeForce 256). Decoder: None vs MPEG-2 Motion Comp.
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5300 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | None | MPEG-2 Motion Comp |
| Codecs | MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce PCX 5300 draws 575W versus the GeForce 256's 10W — a 193.2% difference. The GeForce 256 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce PCX 5300) vs 350W (GeForce 256). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Card length: 168mm vs 165mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70 vs 60°C.
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5300 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 575W | 10W-98% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | 168mm | 165mm |
| Height | 100mm | 100mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 70 | 60°C-14% |
| Perf/Watt | 0.0 | 0.5 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce PCX 5300 launched at $60 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the GeForce 256 launched at $199 and now averages $20. The GeForce PCX 5300 costs 25% less ($5 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.4 (GeForce PCX 5300) vs 0.3 (GeForce 256) — the GeForce PCX 5300 offers 33.3% better value. The GeForce PCX 5300 is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5300 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $60-70% | $199 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15-25% | $20 |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.4+33% | 0.3 |
| Codename | GB202 | GP108B |
| Release | January 30 2025 | February 20 2019 |
| Ranking | #3 | #643 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce PCX 5300 and GeForce 256
