Radeon 610M vs GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 and Radeon 610M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 560 Ti 448
2011
1280 MB GDDR5, 210 Watt
8.21
+188%

GTX 560 Ti 448 outperforms 610M by a whopping 188% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking505784
Place by popularitynot in top-10037
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.60no data
Power efficiency2.7113.16
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGF110Dragon Range
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date29 November 2011 (12 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$289 no data

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 cores448128
Core clock speed732 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2200 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)210 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate40.9917.60
Floating-point processing power1.312 TFLOPS0.5632 TFLOPS
ROPs404
TMUs568
Ray Tracing Coresno data2

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
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+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.3
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. 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.

GTX 560 Ti 448 8.21
+188%
Radeon 610M 2.85

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
+114%
Radeon 610M 1965

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 HD35−40
+169%
13
−169%
1440p170−180
+179%
61
−179%

Cost per frame, $

1080p8.26no data
1440p1.70no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14
+0%
14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10
+0%
10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+0%
7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how GTX 560 Ti 448 and Radeon 610M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 560 Ti 448 is 169% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 560 Ti 448 is 179% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.21 2.85
Recency 29 November 2011 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 40 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 210 Watt 15 Watt

GTX 560 Ti 448 has a 188.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Radeon 610M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years, a 700% more advanced lithography process, and 1300% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 610M in performance tests.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
AMD Radeon 610M
Radeon 610M

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.


3.8 28 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 725 votes

Rate Radeon 610M 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.