GeForce GTX 260M SLI vs Quadro M5000M

Place in the ranking	309	747
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	12.53	1.51
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	G9x (2007−2010)
GPU code name	GM204	NB9E-GTX
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	18 August 2015 (9 years ago)	2 March 2009 (15 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	1,536	224
Core clock speed	975 MHz	550 MHz
Boost clock speed	1051 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	5,200 million	1508 Million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	150 Watt
Texture fill rate	93.60	no data
Floating-point processing power	2.995 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	64	no data
TMUs	96	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	large
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	950 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160 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	No outputs	no data
Display Port	1.2	no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus	+	-
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	10
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.5	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	+	-
CUDA	5.2	+

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

86
+514%

14−16

−514%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +256%	9−10 −256%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +350%	8−9 −350%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 +544%	9−10 −544%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +256%	9−10 −256%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +350%	8−9 −350%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 +407%	14−16 −407%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 +1125%	4−5 −1125%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +717%	6−7 −717%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +291%	10−12 −291%
Valorant	70−75 +1380%	5−6 −1380%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 +544%	9−10 −544%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +256%	9−10 −256%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +350%	8−9 −350%
Dota 2	65−70 +622%	9−10 −622%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +244%	18−20 −244%
Fortnite	95−100 +444%	18−20 −444%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 +407%	14−16 −407%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 +1125%	4−5 −1125%
Grand Theft Auto V	65−70 +622%	9−10 −622%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +717%	6−7 −717%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130 +317%	30−33 −317%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +291%	10−12 −291%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60 +375%	12−14 −375%
Valorant	70−75 +1380%	5−6 −1380%
World of Tanks	210−220 +278%	55−60 −278%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 +544%	9−10 −544%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +256%	9−10 −256%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +350%	8−9 −350%
Dota 2	65−70 +622%	9−10 −622%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +244%	18−20 −244%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 +407%	14−16 −407%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 +1125%	4−5 −1125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130 +317%	30−33 −317%
Valorant	70−75 +1380%	5−6 −1380%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	27−30 +1300%	2−3 −1300%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 +1350%	2−3 −1350%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +409%	21−24 −409%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
World of Tanks	120−130 +443%	21−24 −443%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +1133%	3−4 −1133%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +488%	8−9 −488%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +1433%	3−4 −1433%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 +625%	4−5 −625%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +486%	7−8 −486%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +317%	6−7 −317%
Valorant	45−50 +360%	10−11 −360%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	30−35 +93.8%	16−18 −93.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 +93.8%	16−18 −93.8%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	50−55 +500%	9−10 −500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +93.8%	16−18 −93.8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Dota 2	30−35 +93.8%	16−18 −93.8%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +667%	3−4 −667%
Fortnite	21−24 +950%	2−3 −950%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +2600%	1−2 −2600%
Forza Horizon 5	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Valorant	21−24 +600%	3−4 −600%

This is how M5000M and GTX 260M SLI compete in popular games:

M5000M is 514% faster in 1080p

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the M5000M is 2600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

M5000M is ahead in 59 tests (97%)
there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	17.38	3.15
Recency	18 August 2015	2 March 2009
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	150 Watt

M5000M has a 451.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M5000M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M5000M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 260M SLI is a mobile workstation one.

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