OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£200VRAM:1 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):170 W

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 32 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti
5.7/10

Overall score

Score
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 92% of models
Score components

40%

3.6

Technical score

25%

8.0

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

3.6

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 92% of graphics cards
6.8

Value for money

Value for money
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components

70%

5.7

Overall score

30%

9.5

Price

â–¼Worse than 82%
3.6

Technical score

Technical score
3.6/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 97% of models
Score components

44%

1.6

Performance

24%

3.3

Memory

12%

7.3

Power

11%

5.7

Features

5%

8.8

Design

4%

4.7

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 97%
8.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 51% of models

80%

7.7

Average grade

20%

9.3

Popularity

Grades by review (32)
17 reviews: 10 with a printed score, 7 estimated from the review. 15 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 51%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-560-ti
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-560-ti
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-560-ti
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-560-ti
nvidia-geforce-gtx-560-ti
nvidia-geforce-gtx-560-ti
nvidia-geforce-gtx-560-ti
nvidia-geforce-gtx-560-ti
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti

Based on 17 · 21

Reviewers mostly like its gaming performance and quiet fan, but complain about high power use and weak software support.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti

Based on 203 owners sharing their experience in online comments

65%positive17%mixed18%negative

Owners praise its strong gaming performance and value, while citing weak modern-game speed and excessive heat.

What owners dislike

  • Owners say frame rates drop in demanding newer games, forcing them to lower settings to get smooth play.32
  • Owners report temperatures around 80–95°C under load, with loud fans and sometimes artifacts or failures after years of heavy use.14
  • Owners report crashes, black screens and driver errors when overclocked past about 950 MHz, and say the card runs stable at lower clocks.5
  • Owners say the 1 GB and 2 GB memory limits hold back modern titles and video editing at higher resolutions.4
  • Owners say newer driver updates no longer optimize for this card, which can slow performance in some games.3
  • Owners report some newer games, such as Battlefield V and Metro Exodus, fail to launch, and some games crash, sometimes fixable with a file rename.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti

Technical score
Technical score
3.6/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 97% of models
Score components:

44%

1.6

Performance

24%

3.3

Memory

12%

7.3

Power

11%

5.7

Features

5%

8.8

Design

4%

4.7

Connectivity

3.6
Reviews score
8.0
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components:

70%

5.7

Overall score

30%

9.5

Price

6.8
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
500 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 500 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 99.9% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
3,081 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 3,081 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 96.3% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
1,406 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 1,406 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 96.3% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
1.26 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 1.26 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 96% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
1 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 1 GB of VRAM, which is less than 98.2% of graphics cards and equal to 1.8% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.4% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
256 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 256 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 50.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 35.5% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
128.3 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 128.3 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 92.1% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
4,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 4,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 97.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
2
This graphics card supports PCIe 2, which is older than on 98.4% of graphics cards and equal to 1.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
11.1
This graphics card supports DirectX 11.1, which is older than on 99.6% of graphics cards and equal to 0.4% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.1
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.1, which is older than on 98.9% of graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
Max displays supported
2
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 2 displays, which is fewer than 97.7% of graphics cards and equal to 2.1% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
2560x1600
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 2560x1600, which is lower than that of 97.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
1
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 1 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 88.1% of graphics cards and equal to 8.7% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.1a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.1a, which is older than on 99.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
1.62 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 1.62 Gbps, which is slower than on 95.4% of graphics cards and equal to 1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
170 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 170 W, which is lower than that of 63.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.9% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
170 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 170 W under peak load, which is lower than 66.6% of graphics cards and equal to 1.7% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
500 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 500 W PSU, which is lower than that of 75.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.8% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
170 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 170 W, which is lower than that of 67.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.4% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
170 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
229x 111x 38 mm
Length
229 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 229 mm long, which is shorter than 81.1% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.9% of graphics cards.
Height
111.15 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 111.15 mm tall, which is shorter than 81.1% of graphics cards and equal in height to 2.4% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
907 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 907 g, which is lighter than 62.3% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.8% of Graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 2.29x faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (4,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    4,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 53.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (229 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    229 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 13.85 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111.2 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111.15 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 2 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    2 vs 0
  • 11.1% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 51% of models

    80%

    7.7

    Average grade

    20%

    9.3

    Popularity

    Grades by review (32)
    17 reviews: 10 with a printed score, 7 estimated from the review. 15 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.0 vs 7.2
  • 11.1% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 51% of models

    80%

    7.7

    Average grade

    20%

    9.3

    Popularity

    Grades by review (32)
    17 reviews: 10 with a printed score, 7 estimated from the review. 15 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.0 vs 7.2
  • 2.6x cheaper
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti is cheaper than the average graphics card (£200 vs £520).
    £200 vs £520
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 2.29x faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (4,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    4,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 2 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    2 vs 0
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 20.9% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (170 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    170 W vs 215 W
  • 53.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (229 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    229 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 13.85 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111.2 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111.15 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 67.2% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (822 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    822 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 11 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (1 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    1 GB vs 12 GB
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 32 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    8 vs 40
  • 8x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (40 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    40 nm vs 5 nm
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • 57.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (823 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    823 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 53.8% lower sentiment score
    3.6 vs 7.8
  • 8.6% worse value for money
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.83 vs 7.4).
    6.83 vs 7.41
  • 67.2% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (822 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    822 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 32 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    8 vs 40
  • 57.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (823 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    823 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 120 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (64 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    64 vs 184
  • 86.1% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (52.7 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    52.67 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 91.8% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (13.2 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    13.17 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 32 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    32 vs 64
  • 94.4% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (1.3 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    1.26 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 12 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2011 vs 2023).
    January 2011
    2011 vs 2023
  • 86.4% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (3,081 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    3,081 points vs 22,638 points
  • 96.6% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (500 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    500 points vs 14,779 points
  • 88.4% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (1,406 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    1,406 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 95.7% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (1.3 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    1.26 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 77.1% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.11 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 3,968 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (384 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    384 vs 4,352
  • 11 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (1 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    1 GB vs 12 GB
  • 78.9% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (4,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    4,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 71.4% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (128.3 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    128.3 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 50% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (64 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    64 KB vs 128 KB
  • 8x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (40 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    40 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (2 vs 4).
    2 vs 4
  • No FSR support
    This graphics card does not support FSR, the average graphics card does.
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.1 vs 1.4).
    1.1 vs 1.4
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (11.1 vs 12 Ultimate).
    11.1 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (1.1 vs 3).
    1.1 vs 3
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (5.1 vs 6.8).
    5.1 vs 6.8
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 91.5% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (1950 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    1,950 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (3 vs 3.1).
    3 vs 3.1
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4a vs 2.1a).
    1.4a vs 2.1a
  • 2 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    1 vs 3
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 2 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (2 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    2 vs 4
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • No VRR support
    This graphics card does not support VRR, the average graphics card does.
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.1a vs 1.4a).
    1.1a vs 1.4a
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 2.3).
    1.4 vs 2.3
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (2560x1600 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    2560x1600 vs 7680x4320
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 92.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (1.6 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    1.62 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
    vendor-name contamination removed; fan stop support unresolved.
  • 37 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (37 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    37 dB vs 0 dB
  • 9 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (76 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    76 °C vs 67 °C
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

4.0
Adrian's Tech Base
≈ estimated
05/09/2026
Hands-on review · game, benchmark and emulator tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti handles old games acceptably, but it is not worth buying today, and the reviewer advises against it.
7.0
The Tech Quest
≈ estimated
07/05/2026
Retrospective review · game benchmarks and power draw
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti still handles games from its era well, but it is not worth seeking out today.
4.0
TechLabUK
≈ estimated
09/12/2025
Hands-on gaming test · older titles and a 2025 verdict
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti is not worth buying in 2025, though it handles some older games at 1080p.
8.0
DanielC
≈ estimated
02/10/2025
Hands-on review · benchmarks and fan noise tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti is still a solid performer for its age and a good card to keep in a collection.
4.0
zWORMz Gaming
≈ estimated
09/06/2024
Hands-on review · 20 games tested on a 13-year-old card
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti plays many older games decently, but its power draw and age make it hard to recommend in 2024.
7.0
DanielC
≈ estimated
26/05/2024
Hands-on review · 2GB model in 2024 game tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti is worth it for collectors who find one with good thermals; otherwise, pick a DirectX 12 card.
7.0
TechWithJohannes
≈ estimated
23/02/2024
Hands-on benchmarks · older games at low settings
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti is not suited to modern games, but it runs older and indie titles fine on low settings.
7.0
DanielC
≈ estimated
20/10/2023
Hands-on gaming test · older titles at 720p and 1080p
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti is fine for an old build and light games, but it lacks support for newer titles.
8.0
DanielC
≈ estimated
06/09/2023
Benchmark test · online games at 1080p in 2023
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti is still a strong budget pick for online games, though demanding titles need lower settings.
7.0
Nerdy Throwback Tech
≈ estimated
13/06/2023
Hands-on review · benchmarks and game tests on an old card
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti still plays modest titles, but it struggles with recent AAA games.
6.0
DanielC
≈ estimated
25/06/2022
Hands-on review · 10 games tested at low settings
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti needs the 2GB model plus low settings or a lower resolution for decent frame rates.
4.0
zWORMz Gaming
≈ estimated
21/03/2021
Hands-on gaming test · 13 older games at 720p and 1080p
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti is not recommended in 2021 because of old drivers, no support for the newest games, and high power draw.
More graded video reviews (5)
creator’s own scoreestimated by us

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
alphr.com
≈ estimated
25/01/2011
Benchmark review · Overclocking
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is a cool, quiet midrange card that comes close to faster high-end rivals in Crysis and overclocks well, but draws more power than AMD cards.
8.0
guru3d.com
≈ estimated
24/01/2011
Preview · Midrange card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is a quiet, low-power midrange card aimed at the Radeon HD 6870, though this preview does not test its speed yet.
8.0
techpowerup.com
✓ explicit
25/01/2011
Multi-GPU review · Two-card setup
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti in SLI suits buyers who already own one card and want a second for high-detail gaming, though it lacks 3-way SLI support.
7.0
uk.pcmag.com
✓ explicit
13/02/2012
Review · Midrange card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti suits anyone who hasn't upgraded in a few years, with strong gaming speed and low power use, though overclocked GTX 460 cards come close.
8.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
06/06/2011
Benchmark test · SLI versus AMD
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is a solid stock card that pairs well in SLI, but the Radeon HD 6950 beats it in most tests.
10
expertreviews.co.uk
✓ explicit
25/01/2011
Lab test · Overclocking results
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is a clear step up from the GTX 460 and rewards overclocking, but at stock speeds it doesn't clearly beat AMD's rivals.
7.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
25/01/2011
Reference card test · Benchmarks
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is a GTX 460 with all 384 shader units enabled and higher clocks, aimed at the Radeon HD 6870.
7.5
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
25/01/2011
Benchmark test · Quiet cooling
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is a fast card with 384 active shader units that keeps its fan quiet.
7.7
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
21/03/2011
Benchmark test · Fan noise
Verdict
The Gainward GeForce GTX 560 Ti Phantom is almost inaudible under load and has room for overclocking, though its stock speed trails the Radeon HD 6950.
7.8
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
13/05/2011
Benchmark test · Factory overclock
Verdict
The Zotac GeForce GTX 560 Ti AMP! is the fastest Ti tested so far, with a 950 MHz core out of the box and a full game bundled.
9.0
pcgameshardware.de
≈ estimated
25/01/2011
Lab test · Noise and heat
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is a very quiet, short card that uses little power at idle, though under gaming load it draws more than the Radeon HD 6870.
7.4
01net.com
✓ explicit
18/08/2011
Test · Overclocked model
Verdict
The PNY GeForce GTX 560 Ti XLR8 OC² is a quiet, slightly faster card with a three-year warranty, but its cooler is unchanged and it runs hot.
8.0
lesnumeriques.com
✓ explicit
25/05/2011
Lab test · Midrange card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is a quiet, compact midrange card that matches the Radeon HD 6950 in games, though it uses more power under 3D load.
9.0
geeknetic.es
✓ explicit
25/01/2011
Full review · Reference design
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti often beats the Radeon HD 6870 with moderate fan noise, making it a fit for buyers who want speed without loud fans.
9.0
madboxpc.com
≈ estimated
25/01/2011
Preview · Reference card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is NVIDIA's new midrange card, promising 33% more average speed than the GTX 460 at similar power use, based on the maker's own figures.
9.0
xataka.com
≈ estimated
10/02/2011
Lab test · Factory overclock
Verdict
The Asus GTX 560 Ti DirectCU II is fast and quiet with a factory overclock, but it draws noticeably more power than the AMD 6870 at full load.
9.0
madboxpc.com
≈ estimated
18/11/2011
Review · Factory overclock
Verdict
The MSI GeForce GTX 560 Ti Hawk is a factory-overclocked card with a much better cooler than stock, suited to overclockers who want more headroom.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti

  • Excellent value for price-to-performance at launch
  • High overclocking potential, with some users reaching over 1GHz
  • Generally quiet and cool operation compared to competitors like the Radeon HD 6950
  • Competitive performance in 1080p gaming for its era
  • Compact physical size (approx. 230mm) allows it to fit in most cases
  • Good SLI scaling for users looking for a multi-GPU upgrade path

What customers don't like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti

  • High power consumption under load, requiring a 500W+ power supply
  • Limited 1GB VRAM can bottleneck performance in higher resolutions or memory-intensive games
  • No longer supports modern drivers (limited to version 391.35 from 2018)
  • Limited DirectX 12 support (feature level 11_0 only), causing issues with modern titles
  • Requires two 6-pin power connectors, which may be a hurdle for older power supplies
  • Dual-slot design can block adjacent expansion slots on smaller motherboards

Verdict

The Nvidia GeForce GTX 560 Ti, launched in early 2011, is a mid-range graphics card based on the 40nm Fermi 2.0 (GF114) architecture featuring 384 CUDA cores, 64 texture units, and 32 ROPs. It typically includes 1GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit interface, delivering a bandwidth of 128.3 GB/s with a stock core clock of 822 MHz and a memory clock of 1002 MHz. Main pros include its excellent price-to-performance ratio for its era, high overclocking headroom, and strong DirectX 11 tessellation performance that handled 1080p gaming reliably at launch. However, it suffers from significant power consumption with a 170W TDP requiring two 6-pin connectors, limited driver support in modern years, and a relatively small 1GB VRAM buffer that struggles with contemporary high-resolution textures.

Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found