Radeon RX Vega 9 vs GeForce GTX 260 216 Rev. 2

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated603
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data25.67
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGT200BVega Raven Ridge
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date27 November 2008 (15 years ago)26 October 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$299 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 cores216576
Core clock speed576 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1300 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)171 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate41.47no data
Floating-point processing power0.5365 TFLOPSno data
ROPs28no data
TMUs72no data

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 2.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount896 MBno data
Memory bus width448 Bitno data
Memory clock speed999 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/sno data
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Videono data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12_1
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA1.3-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 27 November 2008 26 October 2017
Chip lithography 55 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 171 Watt 15 Watt

RX Vega 9 has an age advantage of 8 years, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 1040% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2 and Radeon RX Vega 9. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2 is a desktop card while Radeon RX Vega 9 is a notebook one.


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 GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2
GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2
AMD Radeon RX Vega 9
Radeon RX Vega 9

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.


4.8 11 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 21 vote

Rate Radeon RX Vega 9 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.