Arc Graphics 140V
VS
GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

Arc Graphics 140V vs GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

Intel

Arc Graphics 140V

2024Boost: 2050 MHz

Popular choices:

RTX 4060•RTX 3060•RTX 4060 Ti•RTX 3070•GTX 1650•RTX 3060 Ti•RTX 4070•RTX 3050•RX 7600•RTX 4070 Ti
VS
NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

2011Core: 732 MHz

Popular choices:

RTX 4060•RTX 3060•RTX 4060 Ti•RTX 3070•GTX 1650•RTX 3060 Ti•RTX 4070•RTX 3050•RX 7600•RTX 4070 Ti

Performance Spectrum - GPU

Arc Graphics 140V
15
5,168
0.0%
brand logoIris Plus Graphics 655
brand logoUHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs
brand logoIris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs
brand logoIris Graphics 550
brand logoArc 8-Core iGPU
brand logoArc Graphics 130V
brand logoArc 7-Cores iGPU
brand logoArc B570
GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
210
5,200
+0.6%
brand logoGeForce MX350
brand logoGeForce GTX 960A
brand logoGeForce GTX 660
brand logoGeForce MX550
brand logoGeForce GTX 780 Ti
brand logoGeForce GTX 1070
brand logoGeForce GTX 1070 SLI (móvel)
brand logoRTX 4000 Ada Generation Laptop GPU

About G3D Mark

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The Arc Graphics 140V is positioned at rank #308 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Arc Graphics 140V

#63
RadeonT RX 6850M XT
MSRP: $1000|Avg: $600
95%
#298
Radeon RX 550X (móvel)
MSRP: $35|Avg: $35
735%
#300
GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150
666%
#301
GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100
665%
#305
GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50
604%
#306
Radeon RX 6300
MSRP: $60|Avg: $40
600%
#308
Arc Graphics 140V
MSRP: $350|Avg: $300
100%
#309
Radeon R7 A8-8650
MSRP: $49|Avg: $20
99%
#312
Radeon Vega 8 Ryzen 5 3500C
MSRP: $99|Avg: $30
96%
#314
GeForce GT 720A
MSRP: $40|Avg: $40
96%
#315
GeForce MX110
MSRP: $100|Avg: $40
96%
#320
GeForce 940A
MSRP: $80|Avg: $80
94%
#323
Radeon RX 640
MSRP: $159|Avg: $55
92%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The Arc Graphics 140V is significantly newer (2024 vs 2011). The Arc Graphics 140V likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.6% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (4 GB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Arc Graphics 140V.

InsightArc Graphics 140VGeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
Performance
❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.6%)
✅Leading raw performance (+0.6%)
Longevity
Xe² (2024) (3nm)
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014))
Ecosystem
Supports FSR Upscaling
Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM
❌ Less VRAM capacity
✅ More VRAM (+100+%)
Efficiency
💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit
—
Standard Size (267mm)

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $30 versus $300 for the Arc Graphics 140V, it costs 90% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 906.2% higher cost efficiency score.

InsightArc Graphics 140VGeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
Cost Efficiency
❌Lower cost efficiency
✅Better overall value (+906.2%)
Upfront Cost
⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300)
✅More affordable ($30)

Performance Check

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Arc Graphics 140V Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

1080p
low186 FPS
medium136 FPS
high116 FPS
ultra86 FPS
1440p
low96 FPS
medium66 FPS
high55 FPS
ultra39 FPS
4K
low31 FPS
medium24 FPS
high21 FPS
ultra13 FPS
Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

1080p
low132 FPS
medium97 FPS
high75 FPS
ultra56 FPS
1440p
low99 FPS
medium73 FPS
high57 FPS
ultra41 FPS
4K
low35 FPS
medium28 FPS
high23 FPS
ultra15 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

1080p
low199 FPS
medium135 FPS
high67 FPS
ultra39 FPS
1440p
low103 FPS
medium77 FPS
high41 FPS
ultra26 FPS
4K
low52 FPS
medium39 FPS
high21 FPS
ultra15 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

1080p
low127 FPS
medium94 FPS
high72 FPS
ultra51 FPS
1440p
low77 FPS
medium60 FPS
high39 FPS
ultra26 FPS
4K
low32 FPS
medium24 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra12 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

1080p
low233 FPS
medium186 FPS
high155 FPS
ultra116 FPS
1440p
low174 FPS
medium140 FPS
high116 FPS
ultra87 FPS
4K
low116 FPS
medium93 FPS
high78 FPS
ultra58 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

1080p
low234 FPS
medium187 FPS
high156 FPS
ultra117 FPS
1440p
low176 FPS
medium140 FPS
high117 FPS
ultra88 FPS
4K
low84 FPS
medium74 FPS
high68 FPS
ultra44 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

1080p
low116 FPS
medium100 FPS
high78 FPS
ultra56 FPS
1440p
low77 FPS
medium67 FPS
high50 FPS
ultra36 FPS
4K
low51 FPS
medium42 FPS
high26 FPS
ultra19 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

1080p
low168 FPS
medium137 FPS
high111 FPS
ultra68 FPS
1440p
low97 FPS
medium84 FPS
high64 FPS
ultra38 FPS
4K
low42 FPS
medium34 FPS
high21 FPS
ultra13 FPS
Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Arc Graphics 140V and GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

Intel

Arc Graphics 140V

The Arc Graphics 140V is manufactured by Intel. It was released in September 24 2024. It features the Xe² architecture. The boost clock speed is 2050 MHz. It has 8 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 3 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,168 points.

NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 29 2011. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 732 MHz. It has 448 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 210W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,200 points. Launch price was $289.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Arc Graphics 140V scores 5,168 and the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 reaches 5,200 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Arc Graphics 140V is built on Xe² while the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 uses Fermi 2.0, both on 3 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 8 (Arc Graphics 140V) vs 448 (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448).

FeatureArc Graphics 140VGeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
G3D Mark Score
5,168
5,200
Architecture
Xe²
Fermi 2.0
Process Node
3 nm
40 nm
Shading Units
8
448+5500%
✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureArc Graphics 140VGeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
Upscaling Tech
XeSS
FSR 2.1 (Compatible)
Frame Generation
FSR 3 (Compatible)
FSR 3 (Compatible)
Ray Reconstruction
No
No
Low Latency
Standard
Standard
💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Arc Graphics 140V comes with 0 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: System vs 320-bit.

FeatureArc Graphics 140VGeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
VRAM Capacity
Shared
4 GB
Memory Type
Shared
GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth
System
156 GB/s
Bus Width
System
320-bit
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12.2 (Arc Graphics 140V) vs 12 (FL 11_0) (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.2. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 3.

FeatureArc Graphics 140VGeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
DirectX
12.2+2%
12 (FL 11_0)
OpenGL
4.6+10%
4.2
Max Displays
3
3
🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: Xe Media Engine (Arc Graphics 140V) vs UVD 4.0 (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448). Decoder: Xe Media Engine vs PureVideo VP4. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,H.266 (Arc Graphics 140V) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448).

FeatureArc Graphics 140VGeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
Encoder
Xe Media Engine
UVD 4.0
Decoder
Xe Media Engine
PureVideo VP4
Codecs
H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,H.266
H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Arc Graphics 140V draws 15W versus the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448's 210W — a 173.3% difference. The Arc Graphics 140V is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Arc Graphics 140V) vs 550W (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448). Power connectors: Integrated vs 2x 6-pin. Card length: 0mm vs 267mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 76°C.

FeatureArc Graphics 140VGeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
TDP
15W-93%
210W
Recommended PSU
350W-36%
550W
Power Connector
Integrated
2x 6-pin
Length
0mm
267mm
Height
0mm
111mm
Slots
0-100%
2
Temp (Load)
85°C
76°C-11%
Perf/Watt
344.5+1289%
24.8
💰

Value Analysis

The Arc Graphics 140V launched at $350 MSRP and currently averages $300, while the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 launched at $289 and now averages $30. The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 costs 90% less ($270 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 17.2 (Arc Graphics 140V) vs 173.3 (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448) — the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 offers 907.6% better value. The Arc Graphics 140V is the newer GPU (2024 vs 2011).

FeatureArc Graphics 140VGeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
MSRP
$350
$289-17%
Avg Price (30d)
$300
$30-90%
Performance per Dollar
17.2
173.3+908%
Codename
Lunar Lake iGPU
GF110
Release
September 24 2024
November 29 2011
Ranking
#434
#571