NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560
- Videocard is newer: launch date 8 month(s) later
- 4.3x more texture fill rate: 45.4 GTexel / s vs 10.6 billion / sec
- 2.3x more pipelines: 336 vs 144
- 3.2x better floating-point performance: 1,088.6 gflops vs 339.8 gflops
- 3.2x more memory clock speed: 4000 MHz vs 1250 MHz
- 3.4x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2755 vs 811
- 2.1x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 430 vs 203
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3667 vs 3274
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3667 vs 3274
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 17 May 2011 vs 3 September 2010 |
Texture fill rate | 45.4 GTexel / s vs 10.6 billion / sec |
Pipelines | 336 vs 144 |
Floating-point performance | 1,088.6 gflops vs 339.8 gflops |
Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz vs 1250 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2755 vs 811 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 430 vs 203 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3667 vs 3274 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3667 vs 3274 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M
- Around 46% higher core clock speed: 1180 MHz vs 810 MHz
- 4.3x lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 150 Watt
- 3x more maximum memory size: 3 GB vs 1 GB
- Around 36% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 12379 vs 9102
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3350 vs 3332
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3350 vs 3332
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1180 MHz vs 810 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt vs 150 Watt |
Maximum memory size | 3 GB vs 1 GB |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 12379 vs 9102 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 vs 3332 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 vs 3332 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2755 | 811 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 430 | 203 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9102 | 12379 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.82 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 623.187 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.201 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.402 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 62.233 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3754 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3667 | 3274 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3332 | 3350 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3754 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3667 | 3274 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3332 | 3350 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Fermi |
Code name | GF114 | GF106 |
Launch date | 17 May 2011 | 3 September 2010 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | |
Place in performance rating | 877 | 878 |
Price now | $353.59 | |
Type | Desktop | Laptop |
Value for money (0-100) | 10.61 | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 810 MHz | 1180 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 1,088.6 gflops | 339.8 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
Maximum GPU temperature | 99 °C | |
Pipelines | 336 | 144 |
Texture fill rate | 45.4 GTexel / s | 10.6 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 150 Watt | 35 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,950 million | 1,170 million |
CUDA cores | 144 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
Display Connectors | Two Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMI, 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI | No outputs |
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | 16x PCI-E 2.0 | |
Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | 8.25" (21 cm) | |
SLI options | 2-Way | |
Supplementary power connectors | Two 6-pin | |
Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.1 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 3 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB / s | 60.0 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 192 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz | 1250 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
3D Gaming | ||
3D Vision | ||
CUDA | ||
SLI | ||
DirectCompute | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
Optimus |