GeForce RTX 4070 vs GeForce GTX 260M
GeForce RTX 4070
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 260M
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce RTX 4070
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 260M
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 RTX 4070 | GeForce GTX 260M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+6946.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-6946.9%) |
| Longevity | 🏆Elite Architecture (Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) / 5nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (12 GB) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| 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 RTX 4070 and GeForce GTX 260M
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.
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.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce RTX 4070 scores 26,919 versus the GeForce GTX 260M's 382 — the GeForce RTX 4070 leads by 6946.9%. The GeForce RTX 4070 is built on Ada Lovelace while the GeForce GTX 260M uses Tesla 2.0, both on 5 nm vs 65 nm. Shader units: 5,888 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 192 (GeForce GTX 260M). Raw compute: 29.15 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 0.4769 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 260M).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | GeForce GTX 260M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 26,919+6947% | 382 |
| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 5 nm | 65 nm |
| Shading Units | 5888+2967% | 192 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 29.15 TFLOPS+6012% | 0.4769 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64+129% | 28 |
| TMUs | 184+188% | 64 |
| L2 Cache | 36 MB+16264% | 0.22 MB |
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.The GeForce RTX 4070 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The GeForce GTX 260M relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | GeForce GTX 260M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 3.5 | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | DLSS 3.0 (Native) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | Yes (DLSS 3.5) | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce RTX 4070 comes with 12 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 260M has 1 GB. The GeForce RTX 4070 offers 1100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 192-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 36 MB (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 0.22 MB (GeForce GTX 260M) — the GeForce RTX 4070 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | GeForce GTX 260M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 12 GB+1100% | 1 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6X | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 504 GB/s | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 192-bit+50% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 36 MB+16264% | 0.22 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce GTX 260M). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | GeForce GTX 260M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2+10% | 11.1 (10_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6+39% | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 4+100% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 8th Gen NVENC (2x) (GeForce RTX 4070) vs PureVideo HD VP2 (GeForce GTX 260M). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs PureVideo HD VP2. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 260M).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | GeForce GTX 260M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 8th Gen NVENC (2x) | PureVideo HD VP2 |
| Decoder | 5th Gen NVDEC | PureVideo HD VP2 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 4070 draws 200W versus the GeForce GTX 260M's 182W — a 9.4% difference. The GeForce GTX 260M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 650W (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 260M). Power connectors: 8-pin vs None. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | GeForce GTX 260M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 200W | 182W-9% |
| Recommended PSU | 650W | 350W-46% |
| Power Connector | 8-pin | None |
| Length | 304mm | — |
| Height | 137mm | — |
| Slots | 3 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C-6% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 134.6+6310% | 2.1 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 4070 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | GeForce GTX 260M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $599 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $550 | — |
| Codename | AD104 | GT200 |
| Release | April 12 2023 | June 16 2008 |
| Ranking | #32 | #821 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce RTX 4070 and GeForce GTX 260M
