Quadro RTX A6000 vs GeForce GTX 260M SLI

Place in the ranking	750	41
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	11.29
Power efficiency	1.52	13.47
Architecture	G9x (2007−2010)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	NB9E-GTX	GA102
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	2 March 2009 (15 years ago)	5 October 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$4,649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

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 cores	224	10752
Core clock speed	550 MHz	1410 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1800 MHz
Number of transistors	1508 Million	28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	300 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	604.8
Floating-point processing power	no data	38.71 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	112
TMUs	no data	336
Tensor Cores	no data	336
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	84

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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	no data	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	8-pin EPS

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	2 GB	48 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	950 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	768.0 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

no data

4x DisplayPort 1.4a

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	10	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	no data	6.7
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	3.0
Vulkan	-	1.3
CUDA	+	8.6

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 260M SLI 3.19

RTX A6000 56.54
+1672%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 260M SLI 8959

RTX A6000 89510
+899%

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 −1844%	175 +1844%
1440p	7−8 −1743%	129 +1743%
4K	6−7 −1800%	114 +1800%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	26.57
1440p	no data	36.04
4K	no data	40.78

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −1033%	130−140 +1033%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −1550%	130−140 +1550%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 −1200%	110−120 +1200%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −1033%	130−140 +1033%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −1550%	130−140 +1550%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −1900%	300 +1900%
Forza Horizon 5	4−5 −3600%	140−150 +3600%
Metro Exodus	6−7 −1000%	66 +1000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −873%	100−110 +873%
Valorant	5−6 −5120%	260−270 +5120%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 −1200%	110−120 +1200%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −1033%	130−140 +1033%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −1550%	130−140 +1550%
Dota 2	9−10 −1367%	132 +1367%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −333%	78 +333%
Fortnite	18−20 −1178%	230−240 +1178%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −1853%	293 +1853%
Forza Horizon 5	4−5 −3600%	140−150 +3600%
Grand Theft Auto V	9−10 −1322%	128 +1322%
Metro Exodus	6−7 −1200%	78 +1200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−33 −617%	210−220 +617%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −873%	100−110 +873%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −1350%	170−180 +1350%
Valorant	5−6 −5120%	260−270 +5120%
World of Tanks	55−60 −381%	270−280 +381%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 −1200%	110−120 +1200%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −1033%	130−140 +1033%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −1550%	130−140 +1550%
Dota 2	9−10 −1356%	131 +1356%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −561%	110−120 +561%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −1820%	288 +1820%
Forza Horizon 5	4−5 −3600%	140−150 +3600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−33 −617%	210−220 +617%
Valorant	5−6 −5120%	260−270 +5120%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −529%	40−45 +529%
Dota 2	2−3 −4700%	96 +4700%
Grand Theft Auto V	2−3 −4700%	96 +4700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 −695%	170−180 +695%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −3300%	65−70 +3300%
World of Tanks	21−24 −1578%	350−400 +1578%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −2800%	85−90 +2800%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −1700%	70−75 +1700%
Far Cry 5	8−9 −1900%	160−170 +1900%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −8133%	247 +8133%
Forza Horizon 5	4−5 −2525%	100−110 +2525%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −1900%	120−130 +1900%
Valorant	10−11 −2160%	220−230 +2160%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −869%	155 +869%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −869%	155 +869%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	9−10 −2211%	200−210 +2211%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −2100%	40−45 +2100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −869%	155 +869%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −2367%	70−75 +2367%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1600%	30−35 +1600%
Dota 2	16−18 −700%	128 +700%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −3400%	100−110 +3400%
Fortnite	2−3 −4700%	95−100 +4700%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −14800%	149 +14800%
Forza Horizon 5	1−2 −6300%	60−65 +6300%
Valorant	3−4 −4133%	120−130 +4133%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Metro Exodus

+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Metro Exodus	70 +0%	70 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2

30−35

+0%

30−35

+0%

This is how GTX 260M SLI and RTX A6000 compete in popular games:

RTX A6000 is 1844% faster in 1080p
RTX A6000 is 1743% faster in 1440p
RTX A6000 is 1800% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Forza Horizon 4, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX A6000 is 14800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RTX A6000 is ahead in 60 tests (94%)
there's a draw in 4 tests (6%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.19	56.54
Recency	2 March 2009	5 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	48 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	300 Watt

GTX 260M SLI has 100% lower power consumption.

RTX A6000, on the other hand, has a 1672.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 587.5% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX A6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 260M SLI is a notebook card while Quadro RTX A6000 is a workstation one.

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