GeForce RTX 2080 Ti vs GTX 260

Place in the ranking	749	44
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.16	22.29
Power efficiency	1.21	15.72
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GT200	TU102
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	16 June 2008 (16 years ago)	20 September 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$449	$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 2080 Ti has 13831% 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	4352
Core clock speed	576 MHz	1350 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1545 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	182 Watt	250 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	36.86	420.2
Floating-point processing power	0.4769 TFLOPS	13.45 TFLOPS
ROPs	28	88
TMUs	64	272
Tensor Cores	no data	544
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	68

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	267 mm
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	2x 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	11 GB
Memory bus width	448 Bit	352 Bit
Memory clock speed	999 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	111.9 GB/s	616.0 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 HDMI, 3x 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 compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model	4.0	6.5
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
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 3.15

RTX 2080 Ti 56.35
+1689%

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 1215

RTX 2080 Ti 21737
+1689%

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	9−10 −1733%	165 +1733%
1440p	6−7 −1883%	119 +1883%
4K	4−5 −2125%	89 +2125%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	49.89	6.05
1440p	74.83	8.39
4K	112.25	11.22

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

100−110

+0%

100−110

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	125 +0%	125 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	107 +0%	107 +0%
Battlefield 5	244 +0%	244 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Far Cry 5	163 +0%	163 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	197 +0%	197 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	346 +0%	346 +0%
Hitman 3	161 +0%	161 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	285 +0%	285 +0%
Metro Exodus	144 +0%	144 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	106 +0%	106 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	216 +0%	216 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	266 +0%	266 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	181 +0%	181 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	91 +0%	91 +0%
Battlefield 5	224 +0%	224 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Far Cry 5	132 +0%	132 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	152 +0%	152 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	321 +0%	321 +0%
Hitman 3	156 +0%	156 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	267 +0%	267 +0%
Metro Exodus	144 +0%	144 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	255 +0%	255 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	82 +0%	82 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	80 +0%	80 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	103 +0%	103 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Far Cry 5	91 +0%	91 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	168 +0%	168 +0%
Hitman 3	139 +0%	139 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	202 +0%	202 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	135 +0%	135 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	90 +0%	90 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

104

+0%

104

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	166 +0%	166 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	112 +0%	112 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	72 +0%	72 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	67 +0%	67 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	82 +0%	82 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Far Cry 5	84 +0%	84 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	313 +0%	313 +0%
Hitman 3	100 +0%	100 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	162 +0%	162 +0%
Metro Exodus	98 +0%	98 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	251 +0%	251 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

105

+0%

105

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	87 +0%	87 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	66 +0%	66 +0%
Hitman 3	59 +0%	59 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130 +0%	130 +0%
Metro Exodus	111 +0%	111 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	98 +0%	98 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50 +0%	50 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	46 +0%	46 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	52 +0%	52 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Far Cry 5	50 +0%	50 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	107 +0%	107 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	44 +0%	44 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

This is how GTX 260 and RTX 2080 Ti compete in popular games:

RTX 2080 Ti is 1733% faster in 1080p
RTX 2080 Ti is 1883% faster in 1440p
RTX 2080 Ti is 2125% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

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

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.15	56.35
Recency	16 June 2008	20 September 2018
Maximum RAM amount	896 MB	11 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	182 Watt	250 Watt

GTX 260 has 37.4% lower power consumption.

RTX 2080 Ti, on the other hand, has a 1688.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 1157.1% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 441.7% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 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.