GeForce GTS 250 vs Radeon Pro 560X

Place in performance ranking	456	973
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.06
Architecture	Polaris (2016−2019)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	Polaris 21	G92B
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	5 June 2017 (7 years ago)	4 March 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1024	128
CUDA cores	no data	128
Core clock speed	907 MHz	738 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	754 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	150 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105 °C
Texture fill rate	64.26	44.93
Floating-point performance	2.056 gflops	0.3871 gflops

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	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	229 mm
Height	no data	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 6-pin
SLI options	-	+

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	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	5080 MHz	1100 MHz
Memory bandwidth	81.28 GB/s	70.4 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 Connectors	No outputs	Two Dual Link DVI
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	S/PDIF

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.4	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	3.0
OpenCL	2.0	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
CUDA	-	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

Pro 560X 9.53
+515%

GTS 250 1.55

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Pro 560X 3677
+515%

GTS 250 598

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	42 +600%	6−7 −600%
1440p	34 +580%	5−6 −580%
4K	14 +600%	2−3 −600%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16

+650%

2−3
−650%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	31 +520%	5−6 −520%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Battlefield 5	49 +600%	7−8 −600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	29 +625%	4−5 −625%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Far Cry 5	28 +600%	4−5 −600%
Far Cry New Dawn	38 +533%	6−7 −533%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +540%	10−11 −540%
Hitman 3	18−20 +800%	2−3 −800%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +563%	8−9 −563%
Metro Exodus	41 +583%	6−7 −583%
Red Dead Redemption 2	36 +620%	5−6 −620%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	57 +533%	9−10 −533%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +520%	10−11 −520%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50 +525%	8−9 −525%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Battlefield 5	42 +600%	6−7 −600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	25 +525%	4−5 −525%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Far Cry 5	26 +550%	4−5 −550%
Far Cry New Dawn	28 +600%	4−5 −600%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +540%	10−11 −540%
Hitman 3	18−20 +800%	2−3 −800%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +563%	8−9 −563%
Metro Exodus	33 +560%	5−6 −560%
Red Dead Redemption 2	29 +625%	4−5 −625%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +520%	5−6 −520%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +520%	10−11 −520%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14 +600%	2−3 −600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18 +800%	2−3 −800%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Far Cry 5	19 +533%	3−4 −533%
Forza Horizon 4	36 +620%	5−6 −620%
Hitman 3	18−20 +800%	2−3 −800%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +563%	8−9 −563%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +520%	5−6 −520%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20 +567%	3−4 −567%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +520%	10−11 −520%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+525%

4−5
−525%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +583%	6−7 −583%
Hitman 3	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +567%	3−4 −567%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +567%	9−10 −567%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+700%

2−3
−700%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Hitman 3	6−7	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +567%	6−7 −567%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
+800%

1−2

−800%

This is how Pro 560X and GTS 250 compete in popular games:

Pro 560X is 600% faster in 1080p
Pro 560X is 580% faster in 1440p
Pro 560X is 600% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.53	1.55
Recency	5 June 2017	4 March 2009
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	150 Watt

Pro 560X has a 514.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 328.6% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 560X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 250 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 560X is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTS 250 is a desktop one.

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