
FirePro V5900 vs GeForce GTX 560M

FirePro V5900
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 560M
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - 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. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FirePro V5900 is positioned at rank 290 and the GeForce GTX 560M is on rank 165, so the GeForce GTX 560M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro V5900
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 560M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 560M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 4% higher G3D Mark score and 50% more VRAM (3 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FirePro V5900.
| Insight | FirePro V5900 | GeForce GTX 560M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+50%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 560M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro V5900 and GeForce GTX 560M

FirePro V5900
The FirePro V5900 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 24 2011. It features the TeraScale 3 architecture. The core clock speed is 600 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,232 points.

GeForce GTX 560M
The GeForce GTX 560M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 30 2011. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 775 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,281 points.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro V5900 scores 1,232 and the GeForce GTX 560M reaches 1,281 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro V5900 is built on TeraScale 3 while the GeForce GTX 560M uses Fermi 2.0, both on a 40 nm process. Shader units: 512 (FirePro V5900) vs 192 (GeForce GTX 560M). Raw compute: 0.6144 TFLOPS (FirePro V5900) vs 0.5952 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 560M).
| Feature | FirePro V5900 | GeForce GTX 560M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,232 | 1,281+4% |
| Architecture | TeraScale 3 | Fermi 2.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 512+167% | 192 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6144 TFLOPS+3% | 0.5952 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+33% | 24 |
| TMUs | 32 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 256 KB+100% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+33% | 384 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro V5900 | GeForce GTX 560M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FirePro V5900 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 560M has 3 GB. The GeForce GTX 560M offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (FirePro V5900) vs 384 KB (GeForce GTX 560M) — the FirePro V5900 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro V5900 | GeForce GTX 560M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 3 GB+50% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+33% | 384 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.2 (FirePro V5900) vs 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTX 560M). Vulkan: None vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.4 vs 4.0. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.
| Feature | FirePro V5900 | GeForce GTX 560M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.2 | 12 (11_0)+7% |
| Vulkan | None | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.4+10% | 4.0 |
| Max Displays | 3+50% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (FirePro V5900) vs PureVideo HD VP4 (GeForce GTX 560M). Decoder: UVD 3.1 vs PureVideo HD VP4. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (FirePro V5900) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 ASP (GeForce GTX 560M).
| Feature | FirePro V5900 | GeForce GTX 560M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | PureVideo HD VP4 |
| Decoder | UVD 3.1 | PureVideo HD VP4 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 ASP |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro V5900 draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 560M's 75W — a 0% difference. The GeForce GTX 560M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro V5900) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 560M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 85°C.
| Feature | FirePro V5900 | GeForce GTX 560M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 229mm | — |
| Height | 112mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 80-6% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 16.4 | 17.1+4% |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












