Iris Graphics 6100 vs GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 with Iris Graphics 6100, including specs and performance data.

GTX 560 Ti 448
2011
1280 MB GDDR5, 210 Watt
8.26
+255%

GTX 560 Ti 448 outperforms Iris Graphics 6100 by a whopping 255% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking515860
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.72no data
Power efficiency2.7010.67
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)
GPU code nameGF110Broadwell GT3
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date29 November 2011 (13 years ago)5 January 2015 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$289 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores448384
Core clock speed732 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1000 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)210 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate40.9948.00
Floating-point processing power1.312 TFLOPS0.768 TFLOPS
ROPs406
TMUs5648

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 x16Ring Bus
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1280 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width320 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed950 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth152.0 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-HDMIPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A+
CUDA2.0-

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.

GTX 560 Ti 448 8.26
+255%
Iris Graphics 6100 2.33

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 448 4210
+382%
Iris Graphics 6100 874

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 HD45−50
+221%
14
−221%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.42no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 33
+0%
33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 21
+0%
21
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 18
+0%
18
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how GTX 560 Ti 448 and Iris Graphics 6100 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 560 Ti 448 is 221% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.26 2.33
Recency 29 November 2011 5 January 2015
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 210 Watt 15 Watt

GTX 560 Ti 448 has a 254.5% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Graphics 6100, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 1300% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Graphics 6100 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 is a desktop card while Iris Graphics 6100 is a notebook one.

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 448
GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
Intel Iris Graphics 6100
Iris Graphics 6100

Other comparisons

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.


3.8 28 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 139 votes

Rate Iris Graphics 6100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 or Iris Graphics 6100, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.