GeForce RTX 3070 vs GTS 250

Place in the ranking	970	41
Place by popularity	not in top-100	38
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.06	59.09
Power efficiency	0.72	18.36
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	G92B	GA104
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	4 March 2009 (15 years ago)	1 September 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	$499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 3070 has 98383% better value for money than GTS 250.

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 cores	128	5888
Core clock speed	738 MHz	1500 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1725 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	17,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	220 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	44.93	317.4
Floating-point processing power	0.3871 TFLOPS	20.31 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	96
TMUs	64	184
Tensor Cores	no data	184
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	46

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	229 mm	242 mm
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	1x 12-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 type	GDDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1100 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	70.4 GB/s	448.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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 Connectors	Two Dual Link DVI	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.0	6.5
OpenGL	3.0	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
CUDA	+	8.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTS 250 1.54

RTX 3070 57.96
+3664%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTS 250 594

RTX 3070 22359
+3664%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	3−4 −4900%	150 +4900%
1440p	2−3 −4750%	97 +4750%
4K	1−2 −6300%	64 +6300%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	66.33	3.33
1440p	99.50	5.14
4K	199.00	7.80

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

147

+0%

147

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	125 +0%	125 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	100 +0%	100 +0%
Battlefield 5	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	139 +0%	139 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Hitman 3	109 +0%	109 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	144 +0%	144 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	118 +0%	118 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	174 +0%	174 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	87 +0%	87 +0%
Battlefield 5	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	126 +0%	126 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Hitman 3	116 +0%	116 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	144 +0%	144 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	255 +0%	255 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	178 +0%	178 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	81 +0%	81 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	78 +0%	78 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	102 +0%	102 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Hitman 3	111 +0%	111 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	181 +0%	181 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	223 +0%	223 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	121 +0%	121 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85 +0%	85 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

116

+0%

116

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	68 +0%	68 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	65 +0%	65 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	62 +0%	62 +0%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Hitman 3	96 +0%	96 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	146 +0%	146 +0%
Metro Exodus	101 +0%	101 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	166 +0%	166 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	175 +0%	175 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

114

+0%

114

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Hitman 3	52 +0%	52 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%
Metro Exodus	107 +0%	107 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	90 +0%	90 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	48 +0%	48 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	43 +0%	43 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	30 +0%	30 +0%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	97 +0%	97 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	38 +0%	38 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

This is how GTS 250 and RTX 3070 compete in popular games:

RTX 3070 is 4900% faster in 1080p
RTX 3070 is 4750% faster in 1440p
RTX 3070 is 6300% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.54	57.96
Recency	4 March 2009	1 September 2020
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	220 Watt

GTS 250 has 46.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 3070, on the other hand, has a 3663.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 587.5% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3070 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 250 in performance tests.

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