Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 560v
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 560v with Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q, including specs and performance data.
RTX 4000 Max-Q outperforms ATI Mobility HD 560v by a whopping 3668% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1143 | 178 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.90 | 27.53 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Turing (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | M96 | TU104 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 5 May 2010 (14 years ago) | 27 May 2019 (5 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 cores | 320 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 780 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1380 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 514 million | 13,600 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 80 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 17.60 | 220.8 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.352 TFLOPS | 7.066 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 64 |
| TMUs | 32 | 160 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 320 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 40 |
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 size | medium sized | large |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 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 | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1625 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 416.0 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 | No outputs |
| G-SYNC support | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| VR Ready | no data | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | - | 7.5 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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 | 2−3
−4250%
| 87
+4250%
|
| 1440p | 1−2
−4500%
| 46
+4500%
|
| 4K | 1−2
−4700%
| 48
+4700%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
−2800%
|
85−90
+2800%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−3300%
|
65−70
+3300%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
−2800%
|
85−90
+2800%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−3300%
|
65−70
+3300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2260%
|
110−120
+2260%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1400%
|
120−130
+1400%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−537%
|
190−200
+537%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
−2800%
|
85−90
+2800%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
−1205%
|
270−280
+1205%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−3300%
|
65−70
+3300%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−723%
|
107
+723%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2260%
|
110−120
+2260%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−6800%
|
65−70
+6800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1400%
|
120−130
+1400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−2200%
|
115
+2200%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−537%
|
190−200
+537%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−3300%
|
65−70
+3300%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−677%
|
101
+677%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2260%
|
110−120
+2260%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1400%
|
120−130
+1400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−1160%
|
63
+1160%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−537%
|
190−200
+537%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 4−5
−5125%
|
200−210
+5125%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−2088%
|
170−180
+2088%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 30−35 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 70−75 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−3950%
|
80−85
+3950%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
−7500%
|
75−80
+7500%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 0−1 | 24−27 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−300%
|
60−65
+300%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−3520%
|
180−190
+3520%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 14−16 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−3600%
|
35−40
+3600%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−1650%
|
35−40
+1650%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1700%
|
35−40
+1700%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Valorant | 220−230
+0%
|
220−230
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 36
+0%
|
36
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 65
+0%
|
65
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
This is how ATI Mobility HD 560v and RTX 4000 Max-Q compete in popular games:
- RTX 4000 Max-Q is 4250% faster in 1080p
- RTX 4000 Max-Q is 4500% faster in 1440p
- RTX 4000 Max-Q is 4700% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1440p resolution and the Epic Preset, the RTX 4000 Max-Q is 7500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 4000 Max-Q is ahead in 31 test (53%)
- there's a draw in 28 tests (47%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.74 | 27.88 |
| Recency | 5 May 2010 | 27 May 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 80 Watt |
ATI Mobility HD 560v has 433.3% lower power consumption.
RTX 4000 Max-Q, on the other hand, has a 3667.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 358.3% more advanced lithography process.
The Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 560v in performance tests.
Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 560v is a notebook graphics card while Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
