UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs vs GeForce GTX 260M

Place in the ranking	1107	652
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.04	11.25
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code name	G92	Tiger Lake Xe
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	3 March 2009 (15 years ago)	15 August 2020 (4 years ago)

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	112	48
Core clock speed	550 MHz	350 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1450 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	28 Watt
Texture fill rate	30.80	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.308 TFLOPS	no data
Gigaflops	462	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	56	no 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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	no data
SLI options	2-way	-
MXM Type	MXM 3.0 Type-B	no 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 type	GDDR3	no data
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	no data
Memory bus width	256 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	Up to 950 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	61 GB/s	no 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 Connectors	DisplayPortSingle Link DVIDual Link DVIVGALVDSHDMI	no data
HDMI	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
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.

Power management	8.0	no data
Quick Sync	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12_1
Shader Model	4.0	no data
OpenGL	2.1	no data
OpenCL	1.1	no data
Vulkan	N/A	-
CUDA	+	-

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 0.98

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 4.55
+364%

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 4901

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 10650
+117%

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

29
+70.6%

−70.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−267%

11
+267%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −160%	12−14 +160%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −550%	12−14 +550%
Hitman 3	5−6 −100%	10 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −177%	36 +177%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −143%	16−18 +143%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −40.6%	45−50 +40.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −160%	12−14 +160%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −550%	12−14 +550%
Hitman 3	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −131%	30−33 +131%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −143%	17 +143%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −70%	16−18 +70%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −40.6%	45−50 +40.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −160%	12−14 +160%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Hitman 3	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 +8.3%	12 −8.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −129%	16 +129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +25%	8 −25%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −40.6%	45−50 +40.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

1−2

−1100%

12−14
+1100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −700%	8−9 +700%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −400%	5−6 +400%
Hitman 3	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	4−5
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −600%	27−30 +600%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−167%

8−9
+167%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

0−1

3−4

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	2−3
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	2−3
Far Cry 5	0−1	2−3

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−150%

5−6
+150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12 +0%	12 +0%
Battlefield 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Battlefield 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Hitman 3	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

This is how GTX 260M and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs compete in popular games:

GTX 260M is 71% faster in 1080p

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

in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 260M is 25% faster.
in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 1100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 260M is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is ahead in 41 test (66%)
there's a draw in 19 tests (31%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.98	4.55
Recency	3 March 2009	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	65 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	28 Watt

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs has a 364.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 550% more advanced lithography process, and 132.1% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260M in performance tests.

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