GeForce GTX 260 216 vs 8600 GT

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1308not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.47no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameG84GT200
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date17 April 2007 (17 years ago)16 September 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$159 $299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores32216
Core clock speed540 MHz576 MHz
Number of transistors289 million1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)47 Watt182 Watt
Texture fill rate8.64041.47
Floating-point processing power0.07616 TFLOPS0.5365 TFLOPS
ROPs828
TMUs1672

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length170 mm267 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 6-pin
SLI options+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MB896 MB
Standard memory config per GPU256 MBno data
Memory bus width128 Bit448 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz999 MHz
Memory bandwidth22.4 GB/s111.9 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Video2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model4.04.0
OpenGL2.13.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.11.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 17 April 2007 16 September 2008
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 896 MB
Chip lithography 80 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 47 Watt 182 Watt

8600 GT has 287.2% lower power consumption.

GTX 260 216, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 75% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 23.1% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 8600 GT and GeForce GTX 260 Core 216. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT
GeForce 8600 GT
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 Core 216
GeForce GTX 260 Core 216

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.1 1021 vote

Rate GeForce 8600 GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 12 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.