NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE vs NVIDIA GeForce MX330 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark between these two GPUs is Geekbench OpenCL, and the recorded data shows a clear win for the NVIDIA GeForce MX330. The MX330 scores 7896, while the GTX 560 SE scores 7171, giving the MX330 a 10.1% advantage. That is a meaningful gap in raw compute throughput, and it flips the expected narrative for anyone who assumes the older desktop card with a wider memory bus would be faster.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database puts this into perspective. The MX330's average benchmark score of 8458 sits within 0.3% of the AMD Radeon 880M and 0.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX, while being 1.2% behind the Intel Arc A380. The GTX 560 SE, meanwhile, lands at an average score of 7171, essentially tied with the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 (0% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 (0.2% ahead), while trailing the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile by 0.4% and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 by 0.7%. In short, the MX330 occupies a performance tier that is roughly 18% higher than where the GTX 560 SE sits, based on these averages.

The head-to-head delta of 10.1% on OpenCL is consistent with the overall average score difference. The MX330's FP32 throughput of 1,224.2 GFLOPS versus the GTX 560 SE's 847.9 GFLOPS explains a large portion of that gap. The MX330 also has a higher pixel rate at 25.50 GPixel/s compared to 8.832 GPixel/s, and a higher texture rate at 38.26 GTexel/s versus 35.33 GTexel/s. The GTX 560 SE does have more memory bandwidth (91.87 GB/s vs 56.06 GB/s) and a wider 192-bit bus, but that does not compensate for the older architecture's lower compute ceiling in this specific workload.

The data shows only one benchmark where both cards appear, so the win count is 1 for the MX330 and 0 for the GTX 560 SE. That is the entire head-to-head picture, and it is decisive.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 wins with a score of 7896 against the GTX 560 SE's 7171, a 10.1% advantage.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The MX330's average score of 8458 puts it within 0.3% of the AMD Radeon 880M and 0.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX, while trailing the Intel Arc A380 by 1.2%. The GTX 560 SE's average of 7171 is tied with the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580, 0.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970, 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile, and 0.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750.

Q: Does the GTX 560 SE have any advantages in memory specifications?

A: Yes, the GTX 560 SE has 91.87 GB/s of bandwidth and a 192-bit bus, compared to the MX330's 56.06 GB/s and 64-bit bus. However, this does not translate into a benchmark win.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The MX330 has a TDP of 10 W and uses no power connectors, while the GTX 560 SE has a TDP of 150 W, requires two 6-pin connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 450 W.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The MX330, built on a 14 nm process, has a transistor density of 24.3M per mm². The GTX 560 SE, on a 40 nm process, has a density of 5.9M per mm².

Q: Is the GTX 560 SE still competitive in modern workloads?

A: Based on the recorded data, the GTX 560 SE sits at the 39th percentile for all GPUs, while the MX330 sits at the 43rd percentile. The MX330 is also newer (released in 2020 versus 2012) and supports Vulkan 1.4, which the GTX 560 SE does not list.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 wins the only benchmark where both cards appear, so it takes the compute crown outright. Its OpenCL score of 7896 versus 7171 is a 10.1% margin, and its average benchmark score of 8458 is notably higher than the GTX 560 SE's 7171. The MX330 also wins on every compute throughput metric: FP32 (1,224.2 GFLOPS vs 847.9 GFLOPS), pixel rate (25.50 GPixel/s vs 8.832 GPixel/s), and texture rate (38.26 GTexel/s vs 35.33 GTexel/s). For any workload that leans on shader math or fill rates, the MX330 is the clear pick.

The GTX 560 SE does not win any benchmark in the head-to-head data, but it does hold advantages in specific memory characteristics. It has double the memory bus width (192-bit vs 64-bit) and 64% more bandwidth (91.87 GB/s vs 56.06 GB/s). It also has more TMUs (48 vs 24) and more ROPs (24 vs 16), which could theoretically help in texture-heavy or rasterization-heavy scenarios, though the actual benchmark data does not show a win. The GTX 560 SE also has 1,950 million transistors versus the MX330's 1,800 million, but that is on a much larger die (332 mm² vs 74 mm²).

For practical use cases, the MX330 is the one that wins in any compute benchmark we have on record. The GTX 560 SE's memory bandwidth advantage is real but untested in a head-to-head benchmark, so there is no data to support a win there.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce MX330 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE |

|---|---|---|

| Process Node | 14 nm | 40 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 1,800 million | 1,950 million |

| Die Size | 74 mm² | 332 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.3M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1531 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 1594 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Clock | 1752 MHz, 7 Gbps effective | 957 MHz, 3.8 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 56.06 GB/s | 91.87 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 288 |

| TMUs | 24 | 48 |

| ROPs | 16 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 25.50 GPixel/s | 8.832 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 38.26 GTexel/s | 35.33 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,224.2 GFLOPS | 847.9 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 19.13 GFLOPS (1:64) | Not listed |

| TDP | 10 W | 150 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x4 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2020-02-09 | 2012-02-19 |

The MX330 is a much more efficient design: 10 W TDP versus 150 W, no power connectors versus two 6-pin connectors, and a vastly smaller die. The GTX 560 SE counters with a wider memory bus, more TMUs and ROPs, and higher memory bandwidth. The MX330 has more shading units (384 vs 288) and a higher FP32 throughput, which explains its benchmark lead.

Architecture Differences

The MX330 is built on the Pascal architecture, specifically the GP108B chip, while the GTX 560 SE uses the Fermi 2.0 architecture with the GF114 chip. That is a generational leap in design philosophy. Pascal is a much newer architecture, released for the GeForce MX (3xx) generation, and it leverages a 14 nm process from Samsung. Fermi 2.0 is from the GeForce 500 generation, built on a 40 nm process from TSMC.

The transistor counts are close (1,800 million for the MX330, 1,950 million for the GTX 560 SE), but the die sizes are wildly different: 74 mm² versus 332 mm². That means the MX330 packs its transistors at a density of 24.3M per mm², while the GTX 560 SE manages only 5.9M per mm². This is the core reason the MX330 can deliver higher compute throughput at a fraction of the power draw.

The MX330 also supports newer API features. It lists DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 560 SE only lists DirectX 12 (11_0) and no Vulkan support. The MX330 has FP16 capability at 19.13 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), while the GTX 560 SE has no FP16 data listed. Memory technology is the same (GDDR5), but the MX330 runs at a much higher effective speed (7 Gbps vs 3.8 Gbps), even though the narrower bus limits total bandwidth.

The GTX 560 SE has a larger memory bus (192-bit vs 64-bit) and more TMUs (48 vs 24) and ROPs (24 vs 16), which are architectural features from a time when fill-rate and bandwidth were the primary bottlenecks. Pascal shifted toward higher clock speeds and more shader-level parallelism, which is evident in the MX330's 1531 MHz base and 1594 MHz boost clocks versus the GTX 560 SE's lack of listed clock speeds.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear choice for compute workloads: the NVIDIA GeForce MX330. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 10.1%, has a higher average benchmark score (8458 vs 7171), and delivers more FP32 throughput, pixel rate, and texture rate. It also does this at 10 W TDP versus 150 W, with no power connectors required. For any modern workload that relies on shader compute, the MX330 is the better pick.

The GTX 560 SE does have its own strengths in memory bandwidth (91.87 GB/s vs 56.06 GB/s), a wider 192-bit bus, and more TMUs and ROPs. If a use case depends heavily on memory throughput and texture fetch rates, the GTX 560 SE might hold an edge, but there is no benchmark in the database to confirm that. The single recorded test shows the MX330 winning, and the overall average scores reinforce that result.

The MX330 also has architectural advantages that matter for longevity: a newer process node, Vulkan 1.4 support, DirectX 12 (12_1), and a release date nearly eight years later. The GTX 560 SE is end-of-life with no Vulkan support and only DirectX 12 (11_0). The MX330 is also end-of-life, but its feature set is more modern.

Who should pick the MX330: anyone running compute-oriented tasks, OpenCL workloads, or needing a low-power GPU that fits in an IGP form factor with no external power. It is also the better choice for those who want newer API support and higher efficiency.

Who should pick the GTX 560 SE: only those who specifically need its memory bandwidth and wider bus, or who have a workload that is heavily texture-bound and can leverage the extra TMUs and ROPs. It also requires a 450 W PSU and dual-slot space, so it is a desktop-only option. But based on the recorded benchmark data, the MX330 is the stronger performer overall.