GeForce GTX 560 Ti vs Radeon RX Vega M GH

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega M GH with GeForce GTX 560 Ti, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega M GH
2018
4 GB HBM2, 100 Watt
17.04
+116%

RX Vega M GH outperforms GTX 560 Ti by a whopping 116% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking317517
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.73
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameVega Kaby Lake-GGF114
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date7 January 2018 (6 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 cores1536384
Core clock speed1063 MHz822 MHz
Boost clock speed1190 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,000 million1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt170 Watt
Texture fill rate114.252.67
Floating-point processing power3.656 gflops1.263 gflops
ROPs6432
TMUs9664

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceIGPPCIe 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 typeHBM2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2004 MHz
Memory bandwidth204.8 GB/s128.3 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 outputs2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/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.

RX Vega M GH 17.04
+116%
GTX 560 Ti 7.90

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

RX Vega M GH 6573
+116%
GTX 560 Ti 3047

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.

RX Vega M GH 14302
+256%
GTX 560 Ti 4013

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.

RX Vega M GH 10248
+195%
GTX 560 Ti 3470

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:

900p130−140
+106%
63
−106%
Full HD59
−11.9%
66
+11.9%
1440p36
+125%
16−18
−125%
4K28
+133%
12−14
−133%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 39
+225%
12−14
−225%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 44
+120%
20−22
−120%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+155%
10−12
−155%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+133%
24−27
−133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 36
+125%
16−18
−125%
Cyberpunk 2077 30
+150%
12−14
−150%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+122%
18−20
−122%
Far Cry New Dawn 52
+136%
21−24
−136%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+108%
50−55
−108%
Hitman 3 30−35
+120%
14−16
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+88.9%
45−50
−88.9%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+152%
21−24
−152%
Red Dead Redemption 2 39
+77.3%
21−24
−77.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 83
+219%
24−27
−219%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+50%
55−60
−50%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+90%
20−22
−90%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+155%
10−12
−155%
Battlefield 5 33
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 32
+100%
16−18
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+91.7%
12−14
−91.7%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+122%
18−20
−122%
Far Cry New Dawn 41
+86.4%
21−24
−86.4%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+108%
50−55
−108%
Hitman 3 30−35
+120%
14−16
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+88.9%
45−50
−88.9%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+152%
21−24
−152%
Red Dead Redemption 2 48
+118%
21−24
−118%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 68
+162%
24−27
−162%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+69.6%
21−24
−69.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+50%
55−60
−50%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21
+5%
20−22
−5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+155%
10−12
−155%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+91.7%
12−14
−91.7%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+122%
18−20
−122%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+108%
50−55
−108%
Hitman 3 30−35
+120%
14−16
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 56
+24.4%
45−50
−24.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 57
+119%
24−27
−119%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 34
+47.8%
21−24
−47.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+50%
55−60
−50%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 28
+27.3%
21−24
−27.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 39
+160%
14−16
−160%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+117%
12−14
−117%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 13
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+122%
9−10
−122%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+207%
30−33
−207%
Hitman 3 20−22
+81.8%
10−12
−81.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 41
+141%
16−18
−141%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+210%
10−11
−210%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+371%
7−8
−371%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+106%
50−55
−106%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+115%
12−14
−115%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18
+157%
7−8
−157%
Far Cry New Dawn 14
+180%
5−6
−180%
Hitman 3 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+211%
27−30
−211%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+156%
9−10
−156%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%

This is how RX Vega M GH and GTX 560 Ti compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega M GH is 106% faster in 900p
  • GTX 560 Ti is 12% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega M GH is 125% faster in 1440p
  • RX Vega M GH is 133% faster in 4K

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

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX Vega M GH is 500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX Vega M GH is ahead in 71 test (99%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.04 7.90
Recency 7 January 2018 25 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 170 Watt

RX Vega M GH has a 115.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 70% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega M GH is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 560 Ti in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega M GH 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 RX Vega M GH
Radeon RX Vega M GH
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.


4.6 43 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega M GH on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 799 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.