NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data splits this pairing clearly. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE wins the only head-to-head test, the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, with a score of 7,171 against the GTX 675M’s 6,946. That is a 3.2% margin. Both cards sit at the 39th percentile of all GPUs, meaning they occupy the same performance tier, yet the 560 SE edges ahead in raw compute output.

For a desktop builder, the GTX 560 SE is the data-backed pick. It delivers higher OpenCL throughput, and its 288 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs are arranged for a PCIe 2.0 x16 desktop slot. It is a dual-slot card requiring two 6-pin power connectors and a 450 W suggested PSU. The GTX 675M, by contrast, is an MXM-B (3.0) mobile module with no power connectors and a 100 W TDP. It targets laptops, where its 2 GB frame buffer and 256-bit memory bus give it a capacity edge, but its OpenCL score trails by 3.2%.

The verdict from the numbers: choose the GTX 560 SE for a fixed desktop rig that prioritizes compute performance. Choose the GTX 675M for a mobile system where the 2 GB VRAM and lower 100 W power draw are more relevant than a small OpenCL lead. There is no scenario where the 675M wins a benchmark here; the 560 SE takes the sole test.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same silicon foundation: the GF114 chip, built on TSMC’s 40 nm process. Transistor count is identical at 1,950 million, and the die size is 332 mm², yielding a transistor density of 5.9M per mm². Both are Fermi 2.0 architecture parts, with DirectX 12 (11_0) support, OpenGL 4.6, and no Vulkan support listed. The manufacturing process, foundry, and architectural generation are the same.

The divergence comes in configuration and memory subsystem. The GTX 560 SE packs 288 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The GTX 675M raises each count: 384 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. That is a 33% increase in shading units and TMUs, and a 33% increase in ROPs. Despite that, the 560 SE achieves higher pixel and texture rates in the specs? No — the 675M posts 9.920 GPixel/s and 39.68 GTexel/s, versus 8.832 GPixel/s and 35.33 GTexel/s for the 560 SE. The 675M’s higher fill rates stem from its larger ROP and TMU counts.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The 560 SE’s memory runs at 957 MHz (3.8 Gbps effective), while the 675M’s memory is slower at 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective). But the 675M uses a 256-bit bus versus the 560 SE’s 192-bit bus, resulting in 96.00 GB/s bandwidth for the 675M against 91.87 GB/s for the 560 SE. The 675M also has double the frame buffer: 2 GB versus 1 GB, both GDDR5.

Compute throughput flips the hierarchy again. The 560 SE delivers 847.9 GFLOPS FP32, while the 675M delivers 952.3 GFLOPS. The 675M’s higher shading unit count translates to a 12.3% FP32 advantage. Yet in the actual OpenCL benchmark, the 560 SE wins. That suggests the benchmark is sensitive to memory latency or driver scheduling, not just raw ALU count. Power profiles are starkly different: the 560 SE consumes 150 W, while the 675M draws only 100 W. The 675M is a portable MXM module; the 560 SE is a dual-slot desktop card.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 560 SE wins in the only benchmark recorded. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 7,171 surpasses the GTX 675M’s 6,946 by 3.2%. This is the single head-to-head data point, and it favors the desktop part. The 560 SE also has a faster effective memory clock (3.8 Gbps vs 3 Gbps), which likely contributes to its OpenCL edge despite a narrower 192-bit bus. For any compute workload that resembles Geekbench OpenCL, the 560 SE is the stronger performer.

The GTX 675M wins in structural specifications, even if not in the benchmark. It carries 2 GB of VRAM, double the 560 SE’s 1 GB. Its 256-bit memory bus provides 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, slightly above the 91.87 GB/s of the 560 SE. Its 384 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs outnumber the 560 SE’s 288, 48, and 24, respectively. Its pixel rate (9.920 GPixel/s) and texture rate (39.68 GTexel/s) are higher. Its FP32 compute (952.3 GFLOPS) exceeds the 560 SE’s 847.9 GFLOPS. And its 100 W TDP is one-third lower than the 560 SE’s 150 W.

In practical terms, the 675M is the choice for a laptop where power draw and memory capacity matter. The 560 SE is the choice for a desktop where the benchmark result matters. The data shows no overlap in their intended platforms: the 560 SE is a dual-slot PCIe card, while the 675M is an MXM-B (3.0) module with portable-device-dependent display outputs. Each wins in its own environment, but only the 560 SE wins a head-to-head score.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE scores 7,171, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M scores 6,946. The 560 SE leads by 3.2%.

Q: Do both cards use the same underlying chip?

A: Yes. Both are built on the GF114 chip with Fermi 2.0 architecture, using 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die made by TSMC on a 40 nm process.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M has 384 shading units, compared to 288 on the GTX 560 SE. The 675M also has 64 TMUs and 32 ROPs, versus 48 TMUs and 24 ROPs on the 560 SE.

Q: How does memory configuration differ between the two?

A: The GTX 675M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 560 SE has 1 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 91.87 GB/s bandwidth. The 560 SE’s memory clock is faster at 3.8 Gbps effective, versus 3 Gbps on the 675M.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The GTX 560 SE has a 150 W TDP, uses a dual-slot cooler, requires two 6-pin power connectors, and suggests a 450 W PSU. The GTX 675M has a 100 W TDP, uses an MXM Module slot width, and has no power connectors.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life products. The GTX 560 SE was released in February 2012, and the GTX 675M in March 2012.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL. The GTX 560 SE scores 7,171, and the GTX 675M scores 6,946. The delta is 3.2% in favor of the 560 SE. This margin is narrow but consistent with the nearest-rival data. The 560 SE’s rivals include the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 (7,170, 0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 (7,157, 0.2% ahead), the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile (7,203, 0.4% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 (7,222, 0.7% behind). The 560 SE sits essentially at parity with the GTX 970 and the Iris Pro P580, while trailing the GTX 750 and Vega 8 Mobile by less than 1%.

The GTX 675M’s nearest rivals paint a similar picture. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6,975, which is 0.4% ahead of the 675M. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M scores 7,023, 1.1% ahead. The NVIDIA T600 scores 7,035, 1.3% ahead. The AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6,830, which is 1.7% behind the 675M. So the 675M is bracketed by lower-end mobile parts and higher-end mobile parts, all within a 3% window.

The head-to-head result is the definitive data point. The 560 SE’s win is not a landslide — 3.2% is a slim margin — but it is a win. Every other specification comparison favors the 675M on paper: more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, higher fill rates, higher FP32, more VRAM, and a wider memory bus. Yet the benchmark output favors the 560 SE. This suggests that the 560 SE’s faster memory clock (3.8 Gbps effective vs 3 Gbps) and lower latency offset the 675M’s architectural advantages in this particular workload.

For the GTX 675M, the closest rival comparisons show it hovering near the bottom of its peer group. It trails the GTX 680M by 1.1% and the T600 by 1.3%, while leading the FirePro M5100 by 1.7%. The GTX 560 SE, by contrast, is nearly tied with the GTX 970 (0.2% ahead) and the Iris Pro P580 (0% delta). In the aggregate, the 560 SE holds a higher average benchmark score (7,171) than the 675M (6,946), and both sit at the 39th percentile of all GPUs.

The takeaway from the head-to-head section is simple: in the one test that matters for this comparison, the GTX 560 SE wins. The 675M’s larger memory pool and higher shader count do not translate to a benchmark victory. If the selection criterion is OpenCL performance, the 560 SE is the superior card. If the criterion is memory capacity or power efficiency, the 675M takes the lead, but that lead is not reflected in any recorded benchmark score.