GeForce GTX 560 Ti vs FirePro W9100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W9100 with GeForce GTX 560 Ti, including specs and performance data.

FirePro W9100
2014
16 GB GDDR5, 750 Watt
18.53
+152%

W9100 outperforms 560 Ti by a whopping 152% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking331587
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.63
Power efficiency5.193.33
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameHawaiiGF114
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date26 March 2014 (12 years ago)25 January 2011 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores2816384
Core clock speed930 MHz823 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)750 Watt170 Watt
Texture fill rate163.752.67
Floating-point processing power5.238 TFLOPS1.263 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs17664
L1 Cache704 KB512 KB
L2 Cache1024 KB512 KB

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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length275 mm229 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin2x 6-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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount16 GB1 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1002 MHz
Memory bandwidth320 GB/s128.3 GB/s

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 Connectors6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x S-Video2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI
HDMI-+
StereoOutput3D+-
Dual-link DVI support+-
HD сomponent video output+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-2.1

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.

FirePro W9100 18.53
+152%
GTX 560 Ti 7.36

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

FirePro W9100 7747
+152%
Samples: 39
GTX 560 Ti 3077
Samples: 10035

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

FirePro W9100 43046
+302%
GTX 560 Ti 10701

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:

900p150−160
+138%
63
−138%
Full HD160−170
+146%
65
−146%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.83

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Dota 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Dota 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how FirePro W9100 and GTX 560 Ti compete in popular games:

  • FirePro W9100 is 138% faster in 900p
  • FirePro W9100 is 146% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.53 7.36
Recency 26 March 2014 25 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 750 Watt 170 Watt

FirePro W9100 has a 152% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 43% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 560 Ti, on the other hand, has 341% lower power consumption.

The FirePro W9100 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 560 Ti in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro W9100 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 560 Ti is a desktop one.

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.


3.3 19 votes

Rate FirePro W9100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 923 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro W9100 or GeForce GTX 560 Ti, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.