GeForce 8800 GTS 512 vs Radeon Pro 560X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro 560X with GeForce 8800 GTS 512, including specs and performance data.

Pro 560X
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 35 Watt
9.52
+548%

Pro 560X outperforms 8800 GTS 512 by a whopping 548% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking432942
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation14.150.04
ArchitecturePolaris (2016−2019)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code namePolaris 21G92
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date5 June 2017 (7 years ago)11 December 2007 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$349
Current price$133 $146 (0.4x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Pro 560X has 35275% better value for money than 8800 GTS 512.

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 cores1024128
Core clock speed907 MHz650 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million754 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt135 Watt
Texture fill rate64.2641.60
Floating-point performanceno data416.0 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon Pro 560X and GeForce 8800 GTS 512 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data254 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed5080 MHz1640 MHz
Memory bandwidth81.28 GB/s52.48 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDAno data1.1

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.

Pro 560X 9.52
+548%
8800 GTS 512 1.47

Radeon Pro 560X outperforms GeForce 8800 GTS 512 by 548% based on our aggregate 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%

Pro 560X 3677
+547%
8800 GTS 512 568

Radeon Pro 560X outperforms GeForce 8800 GTS 512 by 547% 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:

Full HD45
+650%
6−7
−650%
1440p49
+600%
7−8
−600%
4K17
+750%
2−3
−750%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 31
+675%
4−5
−675%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Battlefield 5 49
+600%
7−8
−600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 29
+625%
4−5
−625%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
Far Cry 5 28
+600%
4−5
−600%
Far Cry New Dawn 38
+660%
5−6
−660%
Forza Horizon 4 53
+563%
8−9
−563%
Hitman 3 18−20
+800%
2−3
−800%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+583%
6−7
−583%
Metro Exodus 41
+583%
6−7
−583%
Red Dead Redemption 2 36
+620%
5−6
−620%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+625%
4−5
−625%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+600%
5−6
−600%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 25
+733%
3−4
−733%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Battlefield 5 42
+600%
6−7
−600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 25
+733%
3−4
−733%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
Far Cry 5 26
+550%
4−5
−550%
Far Cry New Dawn 28
+600%
4−5
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+557%
7−8
−557%
Hitman 3 18−20
+800%
2−3
−800%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+583%
6−7
−583%
Metro Exodus 32
+700%
4−5
−700%
Red Dead Redemption 2 29
+625%
4−5
−625%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+625%
4−5
−625%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 34
+580%
5−6
−580%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+600%
5−6
−600%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14
+600%
2−3
−600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18
+800%
2−3
−800%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
Far Cry 5 19
+850%
2−3
−850%
Forza Horizon 4 36
+620%
5−6
−620%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+583%
6−7
−583%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+625%
4−5
−625%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+567%
3−4
−567%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+600%
5−6
−600%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 25
+733%
3−4
−733%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%
Hitman 3 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16
+700%
2−3
−700%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Hitman 3 6−7 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Metro Exodus 9
+800%
1−2
−800%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%

This is how Pro 560X and 8800 GTS 512 compete in popular games:

  • Pro 560X is 650% faster in 1080p
  • Pro 560X is 600% faster in 1440p
  • Pro 560X is 750% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.52 1.47
Recency 5 June 2017 11 December 2007
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 135 Watt

The Radeon Pro 560X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800 GTS 512 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 560X is a mobile workstation card while GeForce 8800 GTS 512 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 Pro 560X
Radeon Pro 560X
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS 512
GeForce 8800 GTS 512

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.


3.7 173 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 123 votes

Rate GeForce 8800 GTS 512 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.