GeForce GT 755M vs GTX 560M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 560M and GeForce GT 755M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 560M
2011
1536 MB GDDR5, 75 Watt
3.27

GT 755M outperforms GTX 560M by a substantial 34% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking739663
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.156.31
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGF116GK107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date30 May 2011 (13 years ago)25 June 2013 (11 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 cores192384
Core clock speed775 MHz980 MHz
Number of transistors1,170 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate24.8031.36
Floating-point processing power0.5952 TFLOPS0.7526 TFLOPS
ROPs2416
TMUs3232

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0PCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data
SLI options2-way-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB2 GB
Standard memory configurationno dataGDDR5
Memory bus widthUp to 192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1350 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 60 GB/s86.4 GB/s
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 outputs
eDP 1.2 signal supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
LVDS signal supportno dataUp to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display supportno dataUp to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
HDMI-+
HDCP content protection-+
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI-+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming-+

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray+-
Blu-Ray 3D Support-+
3D Gaming+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder-+
Optimus++
3D Vision / 3DTV Play-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 API
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA++

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 560M 3.27
GT 755M 4.37
+33.6%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 560M 1260
GT 755M 1688
+34%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 560M 9300
GT 755M 12711
+36.7%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 560M 1820
GT 755M 2801
+53.9%

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 560M 1380
GT 755M 2106
+52.6%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 560M 4919
GT 755M 4936
+0.3%

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

GTX 560M 15
+7.1%
GT 755M 14

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:

900p31
−80.6%
56
+80.6%
Full HD38
+81%
21
−81%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−50%
27−30
+50%
Hitman 3 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−20.8%
27−30
+20.8%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−10%
40−45
+10%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−50%
27−30
+50%
Hitman 3 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−20.8%
27−30
+20.8%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−10%
40−45
+10%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−50%
27−30
+50%
Hitman 3 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−20.8%
27−30
+20.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−10%
40−45
+10%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Hitman 3 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 20−22
−35%
27−30
+35%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1

This is how GTX 560M and GT 755M compete in popular games:

  • GT 755M is 81% faster in 900p
  • GTX 560M is 81% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GT 755M is 200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 755M is ahead in 60 tests (90%)
  • there's a draw in 7 tests (10%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.27 4.37
Recency 30 May 2011 25 June 2013
Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 50 Watt

GT 755M has a 33.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 755M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 560M 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 560M
GeForce GTX 560M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M
GeForce GT 755M

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.


3.5 87 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 76 votes

Rate GeForce GT 755M 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.