Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) vs GeForce GTX 560 Ti

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 560 Ti and Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 560 Ti
2011
1 GB GDDR5, 170 Watt
7.94
+161%

GTX 560 Ti outperforms R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) by a whopping 161% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking519771
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.84no data
Power efficiency3.20no data
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)GCN (2012−2015)
GPU code nameGF114Kaveri Spectre
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date25 January 2011 (13 years ago)14 January 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores384512
Core clock speed823 MHz720 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)170 Wattno data
Texture fill rate52.67no data
Floating-point processing power1.263 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs64no data

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 x16no data
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount1 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1002 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth128.3 GB/sno data
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMIno data
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (FL 12_0)
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA2.1-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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 7.94
+161%
R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 3.04

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 560 Ti 4013
+74.3%
R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 2302

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 3470
+115%
R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 1616

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
+163%
24−27
−163%
Full HD66
+267%
18
−267%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.77no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+122%
9−10
−122%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+380%
5−6
−380%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+225%
16−18
−225%
Hitman 3 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+95.7%
21−24
−95.7%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+475%
4−5
−475%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+214%
7−8
−214%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+43.6%
35−40
−43.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+122%
9−10
−122%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+380%
5−6
−380%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+225%
16−18
−225%
Hitman 3 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+95.7%
21−24
−95.7%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+475%
4−5
−475%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+214%
7−8
−214%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−17.4%
27
+17.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+43.6%
35−40
−43.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+122%
9−10
−122%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+225%
16−18
−225%
Hitman 3 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+95.7%
21−24
−95.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+283%
6
−283%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+43.6%
35−40
−43.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+214%
7−8
−214%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+200%
10−11
−200%
Hitman 3 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+178%
18−20
−178%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Hitman 3 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+180%
10−11
−180%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%

This is how GTX 560 Ti and R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) compete in popular games:

  • GTX 560 Ti is 163% faster in 900p
  • GTX 560 Ti is 267% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 560 Ti is 1000% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is 17% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 560 Ti is ahead in 61 test (98%)
  • R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is ahead in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.94 3.04
Recency 25 January 2011 14 January 2014
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm

GTX 560 Ti has a 161.2% higher aggregate performance score.

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 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
AMD Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

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.


3.9 826 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 14 votes

Rate Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 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.