GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 vs MX450

Place in the ranking	454	505
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	1.61
Power efficiency	26.81	2.71
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code name	N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1	GF110
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	1 August 2020 (4 years ago)	29 November 2011 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$289

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 cores	896	448
Core clock speed	1395 MHz	732 MHz
Boost clock speed	1575 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	4,700 million	3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt (12 - 29 Watt TGP)	210 Watt
Texture fill rate	100.8	40.99
Floating-point processing power	3.226 TFLOPS	1.312 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	40
TMUs	64	56

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 4.0 x4	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	2x 6-pin

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, GDDR6	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1280 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	320 Bit
Memory clock speed	10000 MHz	950 MHz
Memory bandwidth	64.03 GB/s	152.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.5	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2	N/A
CUDA	7.5	2.0

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.

GeForce MX450 9.68
+17.9%

GTX 560 Ti 448 8.21

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.

GeForce MX450 4725
+12.2%

GTX 560 Ti 448 4210

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 HD	28 +33.3%	21−24 −33.3%
1440p	18 +28.6%	14−16 −28.6%
4K	25 +19%	21−24 −19%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	13.76
1440p	no data	20.64
4K	no data	13.76

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

32
+18.5%

27−30

−18.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +27.8%	18−20 −27.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10 +25%	8−9 −25%
Battlefield 5	30−33 +25%	24−27 −25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +25%	16−18 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	22 +22.2%	18−20 −22.2%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +22.2%	18−20 −22.2%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 +28.6%	21−24 −28.6%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +28%	50−55 −28%
Hitman 3	30 +25%	24−27 −25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +32.5%	40−45 −32.5%
Metro Exodus	55 +22.2%	45−50 −22.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45 +28.6%	35−40 −28.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +18.5%	27−30 −18.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	94 +25.3%	75−80 −25.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +27.8%	18−20 −27.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6 +20%	5−6 −20%
Battlefield 5	30−33 +25%	24−27 −25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +25%	16−18 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	13 +30%	10−11 −30%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +22.2%	18−20 −22.2%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 +28.6%	21−24 −28.6%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +28%	50−55 −28%
Hitman 3	29 +20.8%	24−27 −20.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +32.5%	40−45 −32.5%
Metro Exodus	37 +23.3%	30−33 −23.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +28.6%	21−24 −28.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40 +33.3%	30−33 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +23.8%	21−24 −23.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	89 +18.7%	75−80 −18.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +27.8%	18−20 −27.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	11 +22.2%	9−10 −22.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +25%	16−18 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	8 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +22.2%	18−20 −22.2%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +28%	50−55 −28%
Hitman 3	25 +19%	21−24 −19%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24 +33.3%	18−20 −33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30 +25%	24−27 −25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20 +25%	16−18 −25%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7 +40%	5−6 −40%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

31
+29.2%

24−27

−29.2%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +18.8%	16−18 −18.8%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 +25%	12−14 −25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7 +40%	5−6 −40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +22.2%	9−10 −22.2%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +20%	35−40 −20%
Hitman 3	18 +28.6%	14−16 −28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +25%	16−18 −25%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +40%	10−11 −40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18 +28.6%	14−16 −28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +22%	50−55 −22%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

26
+23.8%

21−24

−23.8%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Hitman 3	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +36.7%	30−33 −36.7%
Metro Exodus	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +20%	10−11 −20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
+28.6%

7−8

−28.6%

This is how GeForce MX450 and GTX 560 Ti 448 compete in popular games:

GeForce MX450 is 33% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX450 is 29% faster in 1440p
GeForce MX450 is 19% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.68	8.21
Recency	1 August 2020	29 November 2011
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1280 MB
Chip lithography	12 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt	210 Watt

GeForce MX450 has a 17.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 60% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 740% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX450 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX450 is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.