Radeon RX 560X Mobile vs GeForce 210

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 210 with Radeon RX 560X Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 210
2009
512 MB GDDR2, 30 Watt
0.27

RX 560X Mobile outperforms 210 by a whopping 3337% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1326437
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.6911.36
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGT218Polaris 21
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date12 October 2009 (15 years ago)11 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$29.49 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 cores161024
Core clock speed589 MHz1275 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1202 MHz
Number of transistors260 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30.5 Watt65 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate4.16081.60
Floating-point processing power0.03936 TFLOPS2.611 TFLOPS
ROPs416
TMUs864

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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length168 mmno data
Height2.731" (6.9 cm)no data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz1450 MHz
Memory bandwidth8.0 GB/s92.8 GB/s
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 ConnectorsDVIVGADisplayPortNo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model4.16.4
OpenGL3.14.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA+-

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 HD0−134

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 41
+0%
41
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+0%
23
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 30
+0%
30
+0%
Battlefield 5 52
+0%
52
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 17
+0%
17
+0%
Far Cry 5 39
+0%
39
+0%
Fortnite 66
+0%
66
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 52
+0%
52
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 34
+0%
34
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50
+0%
50
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 18
+0%
18
+0%
Battlefield 5 44
+0%
44
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 122
+0%
122
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 15
+0%
15
+0%
Dota 2 71
+0%
71
+0%
Far Cry 5 36
+0%
36
+0%
Fortnite 44
+0%
44
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 49
+0%
49
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 31
+0%
31
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 36
+0%
36
+0%
Metro Exodus 20
+0%
20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 42
+0%
42
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 36
+0%
36
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 39
+0%
39
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
+0%
13
+0%
Dota 2 66
+0%
66
+0%
Far Cry 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 38
+0%
38
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30
+0%
30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+0%
22
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 33
+0%
33
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.27 9.28
Recency 12 October 2009 11 April 2018
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 65 Watt

GeForce 210 has 116.7% lower power consumption.

RX 560X Mobile, on the other hand, has a 3337% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 560X Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 210 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 210 is a desktop card while Radeon RX 560X Mobile is a notebook one.

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 210
GeForce 210
AMD Radeon RX 560X Mobile
Radeon RX 560X

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.


2.6 3752 votes

Rate GeForce 210 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 418 votes

Rate Radeon RX 560X Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 210 or Radeon RX 560X Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.