GeForce GTX 560M SLI vs Radeon RX Vega M GL

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Radeon RX Vega M GL Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GTX 560M GTX 560M SLI GTX 570M GTX 580M GTX 580M SLI

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega M GL and GeForce GTX 560M SLI, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX Vega M GL
2018
4 GB HBM2, 65 Watt
10.01
+54.7%

RX Vega M GL outperforms GTX 560M SLI by an impressive 55% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

RX Vega M GL RX Vega M GL
GTX 560M SLI GTX 560M SLI

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking450581
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.754.51
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code namePolaris 22N12E-GS
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 February 2018 (7 years ago)6 January 2011 (14 years ago)

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 cores1280384
Core clock speed931 MHz775 MHz
Boost clock speed1011 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,000 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate80.88no data
Floating-point processing power2.588 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs80no 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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfaceIGPno 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 typeHBM2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width1024 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+54.1%
35−40
−54.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+47.8%
21−24
−47.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+41.2%
100−110
−41.2%
Dota 2 65−70
+40.8%
45−50
−40.8%
Fortnite 55−60
+54.1%
35−40
−54.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+63.6%
21−24
−63.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+47.8%
21−24
−47.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 65−70
+40.8%
45−50
−40.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+47.8%
21−24
−47.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+54.1%
35−40
−54.1%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+17.6%
16−18
−17.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 35−40
+59.1%
21−24
−59.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega M GL is 150% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX Vega M GL is ahead in 17 tests (25%)
  • there's a draw in 50 tests (75%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 10.01 6.47
Recency 1 February 2018 6 January 2011
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 100 Watt

RX Vega M GL has a 54.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 53.8% lower power consumption.

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

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 GL
Radeon RX Vega M GL
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M SLI
GeForce GTX 560M SLI
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

RX Vega M GL Radeon RX Vega M GL
vs
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) Graphics 4 Cores iGPU (Arc)
GTX 560M SLI GeForce GTX 560M SLI
vs
GTX 480M SLI GeForce GTX 480M SLI
RX Vega M GL Radeon RX Vega M GL
vs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7
GTX 560M SLI NVIDIA GTX 560M SLI
vs
RX 560 Mobile 560 Mobile
GTX 560M SLI NVIDIA GTX 560M SLI
vs
HD 6990M 6990M
GTX 560M SLI NVIDIA GTX 560M SLI
vs
R9 M385 M385
HD 6970M AMD HD 6970M
vs
GTX 560M SLI 560M SLI
GTX 560M SLI NVIDIA GTX 560M SLI
vs
RX 550 Mobile 550 Mobile
RX Vega 9 AMD RX Vega 9
vs
GTX 560M SLI 560M SLI
RX Vega 5 AMD RX Vega 5
vs
GTX 560M SLI 560M SLI
ATI HD 5850 ATI HD 5850
vs
Titan X Pascal Pascal
GeForce 945A GeForce 945A
vs
ATI HD 5850 5850
ATI HD 5850 ATI HD 5850
vs
GTX 960A 960A

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.2 22 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega M GL or GeForce GTX 560M SLI, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.