GeForce RTX 2060 vs GTX 260

Place in the ranking	759	134
Place by popularity	not in top-100	23
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.16	39.55
Power efficiency	1.20	15.84
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GT200	TU106
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	16 June 2008 (16 years ago)	7 January 2019 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$449	$349

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

RTX 2060 has 24619% better value for money than GTX 260.

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	192	1920
Core clock speed	576 MHz	1365 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1680 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	182 Watt	160 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	36.86	201.6
Floating-point processing power	0.4769 TFLOPS	6.451 TFLOPS
ROPs	28	48
TMUs	64	120
Tensor Cores	no data	240
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	30

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 3.0 x16
Length	267 mm	229 mm
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	1x 8-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	896 MB	6 GB
Memory bus width	448 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	999 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	111.9 GB/s	336.0 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	Dual Link DVIHDTV	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
G-SYNC support	-	+
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Ready

no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12
Shader Model	4.0	6.5
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	+	7.5

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.

GTX 260 3.13

RTX 2060 36.42
+1064%

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.

GTX 260 1216

RTX 2060 14131
+1062%

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	10−12 −1110%	121 +1110%
1440p	6−7 −1183%	77 +1183%
4K	4−5 −1150%	50 +1150%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	44.90 −1457%	2.88 +1457%
1440p	74.83 −1551%	4.53 +1551%
4K	112.25 −1508%	6.98 +1508%

RTX 2060 has 1457% lower cost per frame in 1080p
RTX 2060 has 1551% lower cost per frame in 1440p
RTX 2060 has 1508% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	90 +0%	90 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Metro Exodus	101 +0%	101 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	109 +0%	109 +0%
Valorant	185 +0%	185 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	147 +0%	147 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Dota 2	83 +0%	83 +0%
Far Cry 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Fortnite	155 +0%	155 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	124 +0%	124 +0%
Metro Exodus	75 +0%	75 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	235 +0%	235 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	56 +0%	56 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Valorant	104 +0%	104 +0%
World of Tanks	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	80 +0%	80 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Dota 2	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Far Cry 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	117 +0%	117 +0%
Valorant	162 +0%	162 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Dota 2	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35 +0%	35 +0%
World of Tanks	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Metro Exodus	76 +0%	76 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Valorant	102 +0%	102 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Dota 2	67 +0%	67 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	67 +0%	67 +0%
Metro Exodus	26 +0%	26 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	115 +0%	115 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24 +0%	24 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	67 +0%	67 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	41 +0%	41 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Dota 2	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Fortnite	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Valorant	46 +0%	46 +0%

This is how GTX 260 and RTX 2060 compete in popular games:

RTX 2060 is 1110% faster in 1080p
RTX 2060 is 1183% faster in 1440p
RTX 2060 is 1150% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.13	36.42
Recency	16 June 2008	7 January 2019
Maximum RAM amount	896 MB	6 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	182 Watt	160 Watt

RTX 2060 has a 1063.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 585.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 441.7% more advanced lithography process, and 13.8% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 2060 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260 in performance tests.

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