Radeon RX Vega 11 vs GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 and Radeon RX Vega 11, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 560 Ti 448
2011
1280 MB GDDR5, 210 Watt
8.27
+50.6%

GTX 560 Ti 448 outperforms RX Vega 11 by an impressive 51% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking509609
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.69no data
Power efficiency2.7110.80
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGF110Raven
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date29 November 2011 (13 years ago)10 May 2018 (6 years 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 cores448704
Core clock speed732 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1251 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)210 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate40.9955.04
Floating-point processing power1.312 TFLOPS1.761 TFLOPS
ROPs408
TMUs5644

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 x16IGP
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-HDMIMotherboard Dependent
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.7 (6.4)
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 8.27
+50.6%
RX Vega 11 5.49

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
+20.5%
RX Vega 11 3494

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 HD40−45
+42.9%
28
−42.9%
1440p7−8
+40%
5
−40%
4K18−20
+50%
12
−50%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.23no data
1440p41.29no data
4K16.06no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Elden Ring 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20
+0%
20
+0%
Metro Exodus 18
+0%
18
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Elden Ring 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 17
+0%
17
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
+0%
17
+0%
Metro Exodus 11
+0%
11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 54
+0%
54
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
World of Tanks 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 42
+0%
42
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 15
+0%
15
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Elden Ring 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
World of Tanks 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 15
+0%
15
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 17
+0%
17
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how GTX 560 Ti 448 and RX Vega 11 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 560 Ti 448 is 43% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 560 Ti 448 is 40% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 560 Ti 448 is 50% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.27 5.49
Recency 29 November 2011 10 May 2018
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 210 Watt 35 Watt

GTX 560 Ti 448 has a 50.6% higher aggregate performance score.

RX Vega 11, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 500% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 11 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 RX Vega 11
Radeon RX Vega 11

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
3.9 1816 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 11 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.