Radeon HD 2600 PRO vs GeForce GTX 560 Ti

Aggregated performance score

GTX 560 Ti
2011
1024 MB GDDR5
7.85
+1327%

GeForce GTX 560 Ti outperforms Radeon HD 2600 PRO by a whopping 1327% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking4851177
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.78no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGF114RV630
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date25 January 2011 (13 years ago)28 June 2007 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 no data
Current price$130 (0.5x MSRP)$100

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 560 Ti and ATI HD 2600 PRO have a nearly equal value for money.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores384120
Core clock speed822 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million390 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)170 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate52.674.800
Floating-point performance1,263.4 gflops144 gflops

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 1.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR2
Maximum RAM amount1 GB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2004 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth128.3 GB/s16 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI2x DVI, 1x S-Video
HDMI+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)10.0 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.1no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 560 Ti 7.85
+1327%
ATI HD 2600 PRO 0.55

GeForce GTX 560 Ti outperforms Radeon HD 2600 PRO by 1327% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 560 Ti 3038
+1340%
ATI HD 2600 PRO 211

GeForce GTX 560 Ti outperforms Radeon HD 2600 PRO by 1340% in Passmark.

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:

900p63
+1475%
4−5
−1475%
Full HD65
+1525%
4−5
−1525%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12 0−1
Battlefield 5 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 0−1
Far Cry 5 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%
Hitman 3 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12 0−1
Battlefield 5 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 0−1
Far Cry 5 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%
Hitman 3 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Metro Exodus 10−12 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12 0−1
Battlefield 5 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 0−1
Far Cry 5 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 0−1
Hitman 3 12−14 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16 0−1
Metro Exodus 6−7 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Battlefield 5 10−11 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 12−14 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 12−14 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4 0−1

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Battlefield 5 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 9−10 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

This is how GTX 560 Ti and ATI HD 2600 PRO compete in popular games:

  • GTX 560 Ti is 1475% faster in 900p
  • GTX 560 Ti is 1525% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.85 0.55
Recency 25 January 2011 28 June 2007
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 170 Watt 35 Watt

The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 2600 PRO in performance tests.


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

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 GTX 560 Ti
GeForce GTX 560 Ti
ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO
Radeon HD 2600 PRO

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.9 757 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 223 votes

Rate Radeon HD 2600 PRO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.