Radeon HD 6530 vs GeForce GTX 260

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking750not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.16no data
Power efficiency1.20no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGT200Redwood
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date16 June 2008 (16 years ago)14 May 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 no data

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 cores192400
Core clock speed576 MHz650 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million627 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt39 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate36.8613.00
Floating-point processing power0.4769 TFLOPS0.52 TFLOPS
ROPs288
TMUs6420

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 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length267 mm165 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data
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 amount896 MB1 GB
Memory bus width448 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz600 MHz
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/s19.2 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVIHDTV1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.0
OpenGL2.14.4
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 16 June 2008 14 May 2011
Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 39 Watt

HD 6530 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 14.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 366.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 260 and Radeon HD 6530. 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 GTX 260
GeForce GTX 260
AMD Radeon HD 6530
Radeon HD 6530

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.


3.8 601 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 5 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6530 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.