GeForce GTX 260 216 Rev. 2 vs GTX 465

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking555not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.15no data
Power efficiency2.37no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGF100GT200B
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date31 May 2010 (14 years ago)27 November 2008 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 $299

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 cores352216
Core clock speed607 MHz576 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt171 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate26.7541.47
Floating-point processing power0.8554 TFLOPS0.5365 TFLOPS
Compute performance30xno data
ROPs3228
TMUs4472

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).

Bus supportPCI-E 2.0 x 16no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length241 mm267 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin2x 6-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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB896 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit448 Bit
Memory clock speed1603 MHz (3206 data rate)999 MHz
Memory bandwidth102.6 GB/s111.9 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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVIMini HDMI2x DVI, 1x S-Video
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.23.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+1.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 31 May 2010 27 November 2008
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 896 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 171 Watt

GTX 465 has an age advantage of 1 year, a 14.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 260 216 Rev. 2, on the other hand, has 17% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 465 and GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2. 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 465
GeForce GTX 465
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2
GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2

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.


3.7 100 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 465 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.8 11 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2 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.