Radeon E6465 vs GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 with Radeon E6465, including specs and performance data.
GTX 560 Ti 448 outperforms E6465 by a whopping 1268% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 505 | 1197 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.60 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 2.71 | 1.66 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | GF110 | Caicos |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 29 November 2011 (12 years ago) | 29 September 2015 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $289 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 cores | 448 | 160 |
| Core clock speed | 732 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | 370 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 210 Watt | 25 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 40.99 | 4.800 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.312 TFLOPS | 0.192 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 40 | 4 |
| TMUs | 56 | 8 |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | None |
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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1280 MB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 320 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 950 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 152.0 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |
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 Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | 2.0 | - |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.21 | 0.60 |
| Recency | 29 November 2011 | 29 September 2015 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1280 MB | 2 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 210 Watt | 25 Watt |
GTX 560 Ti 448 has a 1268.3% higher aggregate performance score.
Radeon E6465, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 60% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 740% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon E6465 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 is a desktop card while Radeon E6465 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
