GeForce GTX 560 vs Quadro K4100M
GeForce GTX 560
Popular choices:
Quadro K4100M
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 Quadro K4100M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro K4100M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.2% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (4 GB vs 1 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 560.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 560 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 560 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 560 holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $261), it costs 89% less, resulting in a 768.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 560 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+768.4%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($30) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($261) |
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 and Quadro K4100M
GeForce GTX 560
The GeForce GTX 560 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2011. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 810 MHz. It has 336 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,768 points. Launch price was $199.
Quadro K4100M
The Quadro K4100M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 706 MHz. It has 1152 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,773 points. Launch price was $1,499.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 560 scores 2,768 and the Quadro K4100M reaches 2,773 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 560 is built on Fermi 2.0 while the Quadro K4100M uses Kepler, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 336 (GeForce GTX 560) vs 1,152 (Quadro K4100M). Raw compute: 1.089 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 560) vs 1.627 TFLOPS (Quadro K4100M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,768 | 2,773 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 336 | 1152+243% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.089 TFLOPS | 1.627 TFLOPS+49% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 56 | 96+71% |
| L1 Cache | 448 KB+367% | 96 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 560 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro K4100M has 4 GB. The Quadro K4100M offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 4 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 560 draws 150W versus the Quadro K4100M's 100W — a 40% difference. The Quadro K4100M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (GeForce GTX 560) vs 350W (Quadro K4100M). Power connectors: 2x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 100W-33% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 350W-30% |
| Power Connector | 2x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Perf/Watt | 18.5 | 27.7+50% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 560 launched at $199 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the Quadro K4100M launched at $1499 and now averages $261. The GeForce GTX 560 costs 88.5% less ($231 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 92.3 (GeForce GTX 560) vs 10.6 (Quadro K4100M) — the GeForce GTX 560 offers 770.8% better value. The Quadro K4100M is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2011).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560 | Quadro K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $199-87% | $1499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30-89% | $261 |
| Performance per Dollar | 92.3+771% | 10.6 |
| Codename | GF114 | GK104 |
| Release | May 17 2011 | July 23 2013 |
| Ranking | #605 | #604 |
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 and Quadro K4100M
