GeForce GTX 560 Ti vs Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) with GeForce GTX 560 Ti, including specs and performance data.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000)
2022
4.42

GTX 560 Ti outperforms Graphics (Ryzen 7000) by an impressive 79% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking659514
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.72
Power efficiencyno data3.23
ArchitectureRDNA 2 (2022−2023)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameRaphaelGF114
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date26 September 2022 (2 years ago)25 January 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$249

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 cores128384
Core clock speedno data823 MHz
Boost clock speed2200 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data170 Watt
Texture fill rateno data52.67
Floating-point processing powerno data1.263 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data64

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data1 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1002 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data128.3 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 Connectorsno data2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_212 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-2.1

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.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) 4.42
GTX 560 Ti 7.90
+78.7%

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.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) 3026
GTX 560 Ti 4013
+32.6%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) 11703
GTX 560 Ti 15494
+32.4%

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.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) 2338
GTX 560 Ti 3470
+48.4%

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:

900p35−40
−80%
63
+80%
Full HD19
−216%
60
+216%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−66.7%
20−22
+66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−60%
16−18
+60%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−100%
18−20
+100%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−83.3%
21−24
+83.3%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−100%
50−55
+100%
Hitman 3 10−11
−50%
14−16
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−55.2%
45−50
+55.2%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−156%
21−24
+156%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−100%
21−24
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−62.5%
24−27
+62.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−27.3%
55−60
+27.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−66.7%
20−22
+66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−60%
16−18
+60%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−100%
18−20
+100%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−83.3%
21−24
+83.3%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−100%
50−55
+100%
Hitman 3 10−11
−50%
14−16
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−55.2%
45−50
+55.2%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−156%
21−24
+156%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−100%
21−24
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
−136%
24−27
+136%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−35.3%
21−24
+35.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−27.3%
55−60
+27.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−66.7%
20−22
+66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−60%
16−18
+60%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−100%
18−20
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−100%
50−55
+100%
Hitman 3 10−11
−50%
14−16
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9
−400%
45−50
+400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9
−189%
24−27
+189%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−35.3%
21−24
+35.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−27.3%
55−60
+27.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−100%
21−24
+100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−87.5%
14−16
+87.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−71.4%
12−14
+71.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
Hitman 3 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−70%
16−18
+70%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−85.2%
50−55
+85.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Hitman 3 0−1 4−5
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−1300%
27−30
+1300%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 5−6

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 1−2
Far Cry 5 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how Graphics (Ryzen 7000) and GTX 560 Ti compete in popular games:

  • GTX 560 Ti is 80% faster in 900p
  • GTX 560 Ti is 216% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 560 Ti is 1300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 560 Ti is ahead in 66 tests (96%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.42 7.90
Recency 26 September 2022 25 January 2011
Chip lithography 6 nm 40 nm

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) has an age advantage of 11 years, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 560 Ti, on the other hand, has a 78.7% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 560 Ti is a desktop one.


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.


AMD Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000)
Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti
GeForce GTX 560 Ti

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.


3.3 229 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 805 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 560 Ti 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.