Radeon RX 7800 XT vs GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 and Radeon RX 7800 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 560 Ti 448
2011, $289
1280 MB GDDR5, 210 Watt
7.59
RX 7800 XT
2023, $499
16 GB GDDR6, 263 Watt
58.50
+671%

7800 XT outperforms 560 Ti 448 by a whopping 671% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking58947
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.5170.04
Power efficiency2.8217.33
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameGF110Navi 32
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date29 November 2011 (14 years ago)25 August 2023 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$289 $499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

RX 7800 XT has 4538% better value for money than GTX 560 Ti 448.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores4483840
Core clock speed732 MHz1295 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2430 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)210 Watt263 Watt
Texture fill rate40.99583.2
Floating-point processing power1.312 TFLOPS37.32 TFLOPS
ROPs4096
TMUs56240
Ray Tracing Coresno data60
L0 Cacheno data960 KB
L1 Cache896 KB768 KB
L2 Cache640 KB4 MB
L3 Cacheno data64 MB

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin2x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1280 MB16 GB
Memory bus width320 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed950 MHz2438 MHz
Memory bandwidth152.0 GB/s624.1 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI++

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.2
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA2.0-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

GTX 560 Ti 448 7.59
RX 7800 XT 58.50
+671%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 560 Ti 448 4210
RX 7800 XT 49707
+1081%

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 HD27−30
−87.4%
214
1440p14−16
−88.6%
123
4K9−10
−87.5%
72

Cost per frame, $

1080p10.702.33
+78.2%
1440p20.644.06
+80.3%
4K32.116.93
+78.4%
  • RX 7800 XT has 78% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX 7800 XT has 80% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX 7800 XT has 78% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 351 351
Cyberpunk 2077 248 248
Hogwarts Legacy 218 218
Resident Evil 4 Remake 272 272

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 160−170 160−170
Counter-Strike 2 355 355
Cyberpunk 2077 196 196
Far Cry 5 204 204
Fortnite 270−280 270−280
Forza Horizon 4 278 278
Hogwarts Legacy 188 188
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 300−350 300−350

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 160−170 160−170
Counter-Strike 2 283 283
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 163 163
Far Cry 5 196 196
Fortnite 270−280 270−280
Forza Horizon 4 261 261
Grand Theft Auto V 178 178
Hogwarts Legacy 144 144
Metro Exodus 172 172
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 366 366
Valorant 300−350 300−350

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 160−170 160−170
Cyberpunk 2077 150 150
Far Cry 5 182 182
Forza Horizon 4 222 222
Hogwarts Legacy 108 108
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 200 200
Valorant 300−350 300−350

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 270−280 270−280

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 175 175
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 400−450 400−450
Grand Theft Auto V 140 140
Metro Exodus 106 106
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 350−400 350−400

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 140−150 140−150
Cyberpunk 2077 99 99
Far Cry 5 176 176
Forza Horizon 4 202 202
Hogwarts Legacy 78 78
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 147 147

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 150−160

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 42 42
Grand Theft Auto V 152 152
Hogwarts Legacy 40−45 40−45
Metro Exodus 63 63
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 118 118
Valorant 300−350 300−350

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−110 100−110
Counter-Strike 2 75−80 75−80
Cyberpunk 2077 45 45
Far Cry 5 104 104
Forza Horizon 4 164 164
Hogwarts Legacy 46 46
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 95−100

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 75−80

This is how GTX 560 Ti 448 and RX 7800 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 7800 XT is 693% faster in 1080p
  • RX 7800 XT is 779% faster in 1440p
  • RX 7800 XT is 700% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.59 58.50
Recency 29 November 2011 25 August 2023
Maximum RAM amount 1280 MB 16 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 210 Watt 263 Watt

GTX 560 Ti 448 has 20% lower power consumption.

RX 7800 XT, on the other hand, has a 671% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 1180% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 88% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7800 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 in performance tests.

Other comparisons

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.


3.9 31 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 5366 votes

Rate Radeon RX 7800 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 or Radeon RX 7800 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.