NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 vs NVIDIA Tesla M10 Comparison

The NVIDIA Tesla M10 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 are two end-of-life graphics cards from different eras of NVIDIA’s lineup, targeting entirely different workloads. The Tesla M10 is a Maxwell-based compute accelerator designed for datacenter virtualization, while the GTX 560 is a Fermi-based consumer gaming card from 2011. Benchmark data shows a clear, though not overwhelming, performance advantage for the newer Tesla part in the single available test.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, which measures raw compute throughput for general-purpose GPU workloads. In this test, the NVIDIA Tesla M10 scores 10,318 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 scores 9,058 points. The Tesla M10 emerges as the winner with a deltaPct of 13.9%, meaning it delivers roughly 14% higher compute performance in this specific workload. This is a meaningful margin, but not a generational leap; it reflects the architectural improvements of Maxwell over Fermi more than a massive increase in raw shader power.

Looking at the broader context, the Tesla M10’s average benchmark score across all its tested workloads is 9,724 points, which places it at the 47th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival in the database is the NVIDIA Tesla C2070, which scores 9,716 points, a deltaPct of just 0.1% — effectively a tie. The Tesla M10 also sits within 0.6% of the GeForce GTX 1070 (9,780 points) and is 0.6% ahead of the Quadro P4000 (9,665 points). This indicates that the M10's compute performance is competitive with much newer and more expensive professional and consumer cards, at least in this aggregate metric.

The GTX 560, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 9,058 points, placing it at the 45th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition, which scores 9,037 points, a deltaPct of 0.2% — again, a near tie. The GTX 560 is also 0.4% ahead of the GeForce GTX 660 (9,022 points) and 1.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon 550X (8,918 points). Notably, the AMD Radeon 890M, a modern integrated graphics solution, scores 9,210 points, which is 1.7% higher than the GTX 560, showing that even integrated silicon has caught up to this aging discrete card in compute terms.

The head-to-head delta of 13.9% between the two cards is consistent with their respective positions in the overall percentile rankings. The Tesla M10’s 47th percentile versus the GTX 560’s 45th percentile suggests that the M10 is not dramatically faster, but it does hold a consistent edge in compute-oriented tasks. The margin is not large enough to suggest the M10 is in a different performance class, but it is enough to be measurable and repeatable in synthetic benchmarks.

Where Each One Wins

The Tesla M10 wins the only benchmark where both cards are tested, the Geekbench OpenCL test. This makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy applications such as GPU-accelerated virtualization, where its 8 GB of GDDR5 memory provides a substantial capacity advantage for hosting multiple virtual machines or large datasets. The M10’s higher FP32 throughput of 1.672 TFLOPS, compared to the GTX 560’s 1,088.6 GFLOPS, reinforces its suitability for parallel processing tasks that can utilize its 640 shading units effectively. Its support for Vulkan 1.4 also allows for modern API access in compute contexts, which is absent on the GTX 560.

The GTX 560, despite losing the compute benchmark, has strengths in other areas. Its 256-bit memory bus and 128.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth are significantly higher than the M10’s 128-bit bus and 83.20 GB/s bandwidth. This makes the GTX 560 potentially more efficient at memory-bandwidth-sensitive tasks, such as certain types of legacy graphics rendering or texture-heavy workloads, even if its raw compute is lower. The card also has display outputs (2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI), meaning it can be used for direct video output, whereas the Tesla M10 has no display outputs at all, making it strictly a compute or rendering offload device. For a user needing a functional graphics card for a legacy system, the GTX 560 is the only viable option of the two.

In terms of power efficiency, the GTX 560 draws less power with a 150 W TDP versus the M10’s 225 W TDP, but the M10 delivers more compute per watt given its higher FP32 output. The GTX 560 also requires a less robust power supply, with a suggested PSU of 450 W compared to the M10’s 550 W recommendation. For a system builder prioritizing low power draw and simple connectivity, the GTX 560 wins; for pure compute density and memory capacity, the Tesla M10 is the superior part.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The Tesla M10 uses the GM107 chip based on the Maxwell architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This chip contains 1,870 million transistors on a die size of 148 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 12.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The Maxwell architecture is designed for high compute efficiency and features 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units.

The GTX 560 uses the GF114 chip based on the older Fermi 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. This chip contains slightly more transistors at 1,950 million, but on a much larger die size of 332 mm², yielding a lower transistor density of 5.9 million per square millimeter. The Fermi architecture has 336 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. Interestingly, the GTX 560 has more TMUs and ROPs than the M10, but fewer shading units, which explains why its texture and pixel rates are not as far behind as its FP32 compute would suggest.

Clock speeds also differ significantly. The Tesla M10 runs at a base clock of 1033 MHz with a boost clock of 1306 MHz, while the GTX 560 has no listed base or boost clock but runs its memory at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The M10’s memory clock is 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective), giving it higher memory clock speed but a narrower 128-bit bus, resulting in lower overall bandwidth. The GTX 560’s wider 256-bit bus compensates for its lower memory clock, providing the higher bandwidth noted earlier.

In terms of API support, both cards support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the Tesla M10 also supports Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 560 has no Vulkan support listed. The M10 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the GTX 560 uses the older PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, which can limit data transfer speeds in modern systems. The Tesla M10 is also a much longer card at 267 mm (10.5 inches) compared to the GTX 560’s 210 mm (8.3 inches), requiring more physical space in a chassis.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in compute benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla M10 is faster, scoring 10,318 points in Geekbench OpenCL compared to the GTX 560’s 9,058 points, a deltaPct of 13.9%.

Q: Does the GTX 560 have any performance advantage over the Tesla M10?

A: Yes, the GTX 560 has higher memory bandwidth at 128.0 GB/s versus 83.20 GB/s, as well as more texture mapping units (56 vs 40) and more raster output units (32 vs 16).

Q: Can the Tesla M10 be used for video output?

A: No, the Tesla M10 has no display outputs, while the GTX 560 offers 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI connections.

Q: What is the difference in memory capacity?

A: The Tesla M10 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the GTX 560 has 1024 MB (1 GB) of GDDR5 memory.

Q: Which card supports Vulkan?

A: Only the Tesla M10 supports Vulkan (version 1.4); the GTX 560 has no Vulkan support listed.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Tesla M10’s average score is 0.1% higher than the Tesla C2070 and 0.6% lower than the GTX 1070. The GTX 560’s average score is 0.2% higher than the TITAN V CEO Edition and 1.7% lower than the AMD Radeon 890M.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla M10 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 |

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

| Architecture | Maxwell | Fermi 2.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 1,870 million | 1,950 million |

| Die Size | 148 mm² | 332 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1033 MHz | N/A |

| Boost Clock | 1306 MHz | N/A |

| Memory Clock | 1300 MHz (5.2 Gbps) | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 83.20 GB/s | 128.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 336 |

| TMUs | 40 | 56 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 20.90 GPixel/s | 11.34 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 52.24 GTexel/s | 45.36 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1.672 TFLOPS | 1,088.6 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 225 W | 150 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 450 W |

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

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | None |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) |

| Release Date | 2016-05-17 | 2011-05-16 |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | 199 USD |