CPU
GPU
GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is significantly newer (2018 vs 2011). The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB 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 1.6% higher G3D Mark score and 33.3% more VRAM (4 GB vs 3 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.6%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+33.3%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $30 versus $60 for the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB, it costs 50% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 103.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+103.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($30) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($60) |
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 GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 and GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
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.
GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 21 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1392 MHz to 1518 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,116 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 scores 5,200 and the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB reaches 5,116 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 is built on Fermi 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB uses Pascal, both on 40 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 448 (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448) vs 768 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB). Raw compute: 1.312 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448) vs 2.332 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,200+2% | 5,116 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 448 | 768+71% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.312 TFLOPS | 2.332 TFLOPS+78% |
| ROPs | 40+67% | 24 |
| TMUs | 56+17% | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+211% | 288 KB |
| L2 Cache | 640 KB | 768 KB+20% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB has 3 GB. The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 156 GB/s (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448) vs 84 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) — a 85.7% advantage for the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448. Bus width: 320-bit vs 96-bit. L2 Cache: 640 KB (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448) vs 768 KB (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) — the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+33% | 3 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 156 GB/s+86% | 84 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 320-bit+233% | 96-bit |
| L2 Cache | 640 KB | 768 KB+20% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FL 11_0) (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB). OpenGL: 4.2 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 3.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (FL 11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.2 | 4.6+10% |
| Max Displays | 3 | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: UVD 4.0 (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448) vs NVENC 6.0 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB). Decoder: PureVideo VP4 vs NVDEC 3.0. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448) vs H.264,H.265,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | UVD 4.0 | NVENC 6.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo VP4 | NVDEC 3.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | H.264,H.265,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 draws 210W versus the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB's 75W — a 94.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 550W (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB). Power connectors: 2x 6-pin vs None. Card length: 267mm vs 145mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 76°C vs 65.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 210W | 75W-64% |
| Recommended PSU | 550W | 300W-45% |
| Power Connector | 2x 6-pin | None |
| Length | 267mm | 145mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 76°C | 65-14% |
| Perf/Watt | 24.8 | 68.2+175% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 launched at $289 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB launched at $129 and now averages $60. The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 costs 50% less ($30 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 173.3 (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448) vs 85.3 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) — the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 offers 103.2% better value. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2011).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $289 | $129-55% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30-50% | $60 |
| Performance per Dollar | 173.3+103% | 85.3 |
| Codename | GF110 | GP107 |
| Release | November 29 2011 | May 21 2018 |
| Ranking | #571 | #440 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 and GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
