NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M Comparison

Launched in 2011 for the GeForce 500M generation, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M is a 40 nm Fermi 2.0 part with 192 shading units, while the 2014 GeForce 900M-series GTX 970M uses 28 nm Maxwell 2.0 and 1,280 shading units. The benchmark data shows a decisive generational leap: the GTX 970M outscores the GTX 560M by roughly 4x in the only shared test, yet both cards sit in the bottom third of all GPUs by percentile, indicating that even the newer mobile part is modest by modern standards.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the shared OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M scores 18,946 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the GTX 560M scores 4,855. The GTX 970M wins with a delta of -74.4%, meaning the older card trails by that margin.

Q: How do these cards rank against all GPUs?

A: The GTX 560M ranks in the 28th percentile, and the GTX 970M ranks in the 27th percentile. Despite the GTX 970M’s massive lead in raw compute, its percentile is slightly lower, reflecting a wider field of faster modern parts.

Q: What are the closest rivals to the GTX 560M?

A: The nearest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX at 4,844 (just 0.2% lower), followed by the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX at 4,867 (0.2% higher), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 at 4,893 (0.8% higher). Interestingly, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB also appears at 4,901, a 0.9% difference.

Q: Which GPUs compete most closely with the GTX 970M?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M3000M is the nearest at 4,621 (0.2% lower), followed by the AMD Radeon R5 M320 and AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, both at 4,657 (0.6% higher). The AMD Radeon R5 M230 sits 1.1% below at 4,577.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The GTX 560M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the GTX 970M supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The GTX 970M also adds Vulkan 1.4 support, which the GTX 560M lacks entirely.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: Both are end-of-life products. The GTX 560M was succeeded by GeForce 600M, and the GTX 970M was succeeded by GeForce 10 Mobile.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: choose the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M for any workload requiring compute performance. Its OpenCL score of 18,946 dwarfs the GTX 560M’s 4,855, a 74.4% delta that represents a multi-generation leap in raw throughput. The GTX 970M also offers 6 GB of memory versus 1,536 MB, double the bandwidth at 120.3 GB/s, and a much higher pixel rate of 49.82 GPixel/s.

However, the GTX 560M is not without a niche. Its 75 W TDP is specified, while the GTX 970M has no TDP listed in the data — this suggests the older card may be easier to cool in constrained chassis, though no wattage figures exist for the newer part. For legacy software that relies on older DirectX 11_0 features, the GTX 560M is sufficient, but it offers no Vulkan support and half the shading units (192 vs 1,280).

The verdict is straightforward: the GTX 970M wins on every measurable performance metric, and the GTX 560M is only preferable if a user specifically needs a lower-power MXM module with a known 75 W draw. The GTX 970M’s 27th percentile versus the GTX 560M’s 28th percentile is a statistical tie in overall standing, but that is a field-wide artifact; in direct comparison, the newer card is overwhelmingly faster.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is a blowout. The GTX 970M scores 18,946, while the GTX 560M manages just 4,855 — a delta of -74.4% from the older card’s perspective. This means the GTX 970M is roughly 3.9 times faster in this compute workload, a gap that reflects the shift from 192 shading units to 1,280, from 32 TMUs to 80, and from 24 ROPs to 48.

The GTX 970M’s texture rate of 83.04 GTexel/s is more than three times the GTX 560M’s 24.80 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate of 49.82 GPixel/s is eight times higher than the 6.200 GPixel/s of the older part. In FP32 compute, the GTX 970M delivers 2.657 TFLOPS versus the GTX 560M’s 595.2 GFLOPS — a 4.5x advantage. These architectural specs corroborate the OpenCL result rather than contradicting it.

For context, the GTX 970M’s OpenCL score places it just 0.2% above the Quadro M3000M (4,621) and 0.6% above the Radeon R5 M320 (4,657), though those rivals are listed against the GTX 970M’s average benchmark score of 4,628, not its OpenCL peak. The GTX 560M’s 4,855 OpenCL result is nearly identical to its average of 4,855, and it sits 0.2% above the 940MX.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge sharply in nearly every measurable specification. The GTX 560M uses a 40 nm process and packs 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die, while the GTX 970M uses a 28 nm process with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die. Transistor density jumps from 4.9M per mm² to 13.1M per mm².

Memory configurations differ significantly: the GTX 560M has 1,536 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 60.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the GTX 970M has 6 GB of GDDR5 on the same 192-bit bus but with 120.3 GB/s bandwidth — double the throughput. Clock speeds also differ: the GTX 560M has no listed base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective), whereas the GTX 970M runs at 924 MHz base and 1,038 MHz boost, with memory at 1,253 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

Compute resources are vastly different: the GTX 560M has 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, while the GTX 970M has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The GTX 560M has a specified TDP of 75 W; the GTX 970M has no TDP listed. Both use MXM Module slot width, have no power connectors, and use the same MXM-B (3.0) bus interface. Display outputs are portable-device-dependent for both.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 560M is built on Fermi 2.0 with the GF116 chip, a 40 nm part from TSMC. It supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but no Vulkan. The GTX 970M uses Maxwell 2.0 with the GM204 chip, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The transistor count difference is stark: 1,170 million for the GTX 560M versus 5,200 million for the GTX 970M, a 4.4x increase. Die size grows from 238 mm² to 398 mm², but the density improvement from 4.9M to 13.1M transistors per mm² shows the process node advantage. Neither card has ray tracing or tensor cores, and neither lists FP16 performance.

The GTX 970M’s boost clock behavior (1,038 MHz) is a feature absent from the GTX 560M’s spec sheet, which lists no base or boost frequency. This suggests the newer card has dynamic clocking capability, though the data does not quantify its effect on real-world performance beyond the benchmark scores.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 970M wins in every performance category measured. It is the clear choice for OpenCL compute workloads, with a 74.4% lead over the GTX 560M. Its 6 GB memory capacity and 120.3 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for larger textures and datasets that would exhaust the GTX 560M’s 1,536 MB frame buffer. The 49.82 GPixel/s pixel rate and 83.04 GTexel/s texture rate suggest it can handle higher resolutions and more complex scenes.

The GTX 560M has only one concrete advantage: its specified 75 W TDP. For systems with strict thermal or power budgets, this known quantity may be preferable, as the data does not list a TDP for the GTX 970M. Additionally, the GTX 560M’s OpenCL score of 4,855 is actually higher than the GTX 970M’s average benchmark score of 4,628, though this is misleading — the GTX 970M’s average is dragged down by its low PassMark scores (28 in DirectX 10, 42 in DirectX 11, 24 in DirectX 12), while its OpenCL and Vulkan scores are much higher.

For gaming, the GTX 970M’s PassMark G3D score of 5,704 versus the GTX 560M’s absence of any DirectX-era PassMark data suggests the newer card is substantially more capable, but direct comparisons in those tests are not available in the pack. The GTX 970M’s Vulkan score of 18,292 further cements its lead for modern API workloads. The GTX 560M is best relegated to legacy tasks or systems where its 75 W draw is a hard requirement; everywhere else, the data points to the GTX 970M.