NVIDIA
GeForce GTX 260 vs NVIDIA Quadro P6000
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
Quadro P6000
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GTX 260 and Quadro P6000 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗GTX 260 outperforms Quadro P6000 by ~12% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+12%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 16Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: GeForce GTX 260 (~12%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider GTX 260
- Lower stated power consumption
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.3 · Not supported
Reasons to consider Quadro P6000
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Recorded feature support: CUDA / OpenCL · No dedicated hardware upscaling (DLSS unsupported)
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
4559
8279
10027
20100
Graphics card ranking
Positions 69–74of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
NVIDIA Quadro P6000
161 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
45
59Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
39
49Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
36
46Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
82Better
79
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
58Better
52
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Device class
Max monitors
Max resolution
USB Type-C
DirectX
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumption—
Thickness
Compute API
Launch price—
Shader units / coresBetter
Memory type
Die sizeBetter
Memory cache—
Interface
Transistor countBetter
Power connector
Release date
Clock speed—
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequency—
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidth—
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Architecture
Recommended PSUBetter
Length
Vulkan
DisplayPort
HDMI
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GTX 260 and Quadro P6000 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
GTX 260Quadro P6000
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
227 FPS
—
1080p Ultra
160 FPS
—
1440p Ultra
89 FPS
—
4K Ultra
34 FPS
—
Counter-Strike 2GTX 260227 FPSQuadro P6000—GTX 260160 FPSQuadro P6000—GTX 26089 FPSQuadro P6000—GTX 26034 FPSQuadro P6000—
Cyberpunk 2077GTX 260147 FPSQuadro P6000—GTX 260126 FPSQuadro P6000—GTX 26065 FPSQuadro P6000—GTX 26023 FPSQuadro P6000—
Forza Horizon 5GTX 260185 FPSQuadro P6000—GTX 260120 FPSQuadro P6000—GTX 26081 FPSQuadro P6000—GTX 26050 FPSQuadro P6000—
Hogwarts LegacyGTX 260120 FPSQuadro P6000—GTX 260100 FPSQuadro P6000—GTX 26058 FPSQuadro P6000—GTX 26023 FPSQuadro P6000—
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100455927%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100376555%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100387059%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 10020100133%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 10082794%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100347777%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100357573%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100387059%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100318290%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100377163%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX10.012 (feature level 12_1)
VulkanNot supportedVulkan 1.3
OpenGL3.34.6
UpscalingNot supportedNo dedicated hardware upscaling (DLSS unsupported)
Compute APIOpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.3CUDA / OpenCL
Architecture and release
ArchitectureTesla 2.0Pascal
Process node65 nm16 nmBetter
Release date20082016
Device classDesktopProf
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count1400 million11.8 billionBetter
Die size576 mm²471 mm²Better
Shader units / cores1923840 CUDA coresBetter
Base clock576 MHz1506 MHzBetter
Boost clock576 MHz1645 MHzBetter
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 2x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm267 mm
ThicknessDual-slotDual-slot
Recommended PSU450 WBetter600 W
Power connector6+6 pin1× 8-pin PCIe
Display outputs and limits
HDMIBoard dependent0 native (DisplayPort adapter supported)
DisplayPortBoard dependentDisplayPort 1.4
USB Type-CNoNot supported
Max monitors34 simultaneous displays
Max resolution2560 × 16007680×4320 at 30 Hz via DisplayPort 1.4
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM896 MB GDDR3Better24 GB
Memory typeGDDR3GDDR5X
Memory bus448 bitBetter384-bit
TFLOPS0.47712.0Better
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 16
- Specifications
- 0 / 64
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (5)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (2)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GTX 260 or Quadro P6000?+
GTX 260 has the higher overall gaming score, while GTX 260 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GTX 260 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GTX 260 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GTX 260 offers more overall performance, while GTX 260 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GTX 260 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GTX 260 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GTX 260 leads in combined 1440p performance. GTX 260 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GTX 260 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GTX 260 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GTX 260 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to GTX 260 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.