NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M vs NVIDIA GeForce MX130 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison recorded in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 scores 6102 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M scores 4855 points. This gives the MX130 a decisive 25.7% advantage. The win count is 1 for the MX130 and 0 for the GTX 560M, meaning the newer chip takes the sole head-to-head contest without dropping a single test.

Breaking down what that 25.7% delta means in practical terms: the MX130 delivers roughly a quarter more compute throughput in OpenCL workloads. That is not a marginal edge; it is a clear generational leap. The GTX 560M, despite its larger memory bus and higher TDP, cannot match the MX130 in raw compute performance. The MX130’s FP32 output is 913.2 GFLOPS versus 595.2 GFLOPS for the GTX 560M, a 53% gap in theoretical floating-point capability. The recorded benchmark difference is smaller than that theoretical gap, but the direction is consistent.

Worth noting is where each card sits relative to its own peer group. The MX130’s average benchmark score is 5508, and its nearest rivals include the GeForce GTX 765M (5501, 0.1% slower), the AMD Radeon R7 M440 (5483, 0.5% slower), and the AMD FirePro M4000 (5537, 0.5% faster). So the MX130 is essentially at parity with a mid-range GTX 700-series mobile part. The GTX 560M, with an average score of 4855, sits near the GeForce 940MX (4844, 0.2% slower) and the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX (4867, 0.2% faster). That places the GTX 560M in the same performance class as a low-end 900-series chip. In short, the MX130 competes one tier higher than the GTX 560M does.

Percentile rankings reinforce this. The MX130 lands at the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 560M sits at the 28th. That four-point gap in percentile means the MX130 outperforms a larger share of the overall GPU population. For a laptop buyer choosing between two older discrete parts, the MX130 is the one that punches above its weight class.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The MX130 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with 6102 points versus 4855 for the GTX 560M, a 25.7% lead.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The MX130 averages 5508 across recorded tests, while the GTX 560M averages 4855. That is a 653-point gap, roughly 13.5% in favor of the MX130.

Q: Which card has better memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 560M has the higher bandwidth at 60.00 GB/s, thanks to a 192-bit bus and GDDR5 memory running at 2.5 Gbps effective. The MX130 manages 40.10 GB/s over a 64-bit bus at 5 Gbps effective.

Q: Does the GTX 560M support Vulkan?

A: No. The database lists Vulkan support as null for the GTX 560M. The MX130 supports Vulkan 1.4, along with DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 for both cards.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The MX130 packs 13.2 million transistors per square millimeter on a 77 mm² die. The GTX 560M has 4.9 million per square millimeter on a 238 mm² die. That is a 2.7x density advantage for the MX130.

Q: Which card has a higher TDP?

A: The GTX 560M draws 75 W, while the MX130 is rated at 30 W. The MX130 achieves better performance at less than half the power envelope.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and different manufacturing nodes. The MX130 uses the Maxwell architecture on a 28 nm TSMC process, built around the GM108S chip. The GTX 560M uses the older Fermi 2.0 architecture on a 40 nm TSMC process, built around the GF116 chip. That node shrink from 40 nm to 28 nm is a primary reason for the MX130’s efficiency and clock speed advantages.

Transistor counts are close: 1,020 million for the MX130 versus 1,170 million for the GTX 560M. But the die sizes differ dramatically. The MX130 measures 77 mm², while the GTX 560M measures 238 mm². That means the MX130 crams a similar number of transistors into a much smaller area, achieving a transistor density of 13.2M per mm² versus 4.9M per mm² for the GTX 560M. This density advantage is what allows the MX130 to deliver higher compute throughput while consuming far less power.

Core configuration also differs. The MX130 has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The GTX 560M has 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The MX130 has double the shader count, which explains its FP32 advantage of 913.2 GFLOPS versus 595.2 GFLOPS. However, the GTX 560M has more TMUs and ROPs, giving it higher pixel rate and a relatively stronger fill-rate profile. Its pixel rate is 6.200 GPixel/s versus 9.512 GPixel/s for the MX130, but its texture rate of 24.80 GTexel/s trails the MX130’s 28.54 GTexel/s.

The MX130’s clocks are fixed at 1109 MHz base and 1189 MHz boost. The GTX 560M has no base or boost clock listed in the database, but its memory clock is 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective), while the MX130’s memory clock is 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The MX130 runs its GDDR5 at twice the effective data rate.

API support differs as well. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the MX130 adds Vulkan 1.4 support, while the GTX 560M has no Vulkan support recorded. That makes the MX130 more future-proof for modern titles that rely on Vulkan.

Specification Differences

The MX130 and GTX 560M diverge on nearly every core specification. Process node: 28 nm for the MX130, 40 nm for the GTX 560M. Die size: 77 mm² versus 238 mm². Transistor density: 13.2M / mm² versus 4.9M / mm². Memory size: 2 GB versus 1536 MB. Memory bus width: 64 bit versus 192 bit. Memory bandwidth: 40.10 GB/s versus 60.00 GB/s. Shading units: 384 versus 192. TMUs: 24 versus 32. ROPs: 8 versus 24. Pixel rate: 9.512 GPixel/s versus 6.200 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 28.54 GTexel/s versus 24.80 GTexel/s. FP32: 913.2 GFLOPS versus 595.2 GFLOPS. TDP: 30 W versus 75 W. Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x4 for the MX130, MXM-B (3.0) for the GTX 560M. Slot width: IGP for the MX130, MXM Module for the GTX 560M.

Memory type is the same (GDDR5), but the effective data rate differs: 5 Gbps for the MX130 versus 2.5 Gbps for the GTX 560M. The MX130 compensates for its narrower 64-bit bus with a faster data rate, but the GTX 560M’s 192-bit bus still delivers 50% more bandwidth. That bandwidth gap matters for texture-heavy workloads, but the MX130’s shader advantage dominates in compute.

Power connectors are listed as none for both, and display outputs are portable-device dependent for both. Production status is end-of-life for both. Release dates differ significantly: the MX130 launched on 2017-11-16, while the GTX 560M launched on 2011-05-29, a gap of over six years.

Where Each One Wins

The MX130 wins in compute-bound scenarios. Its 25.7% OpenCL lead, higher FP32 throughput, and double shader count make it the clear choice for general-purpose GPU compute, physics simulations, and any workload that scales with shader cores. Its higher texture rate also gives it an edge in pixel-dense scenes that rely on texture fetches. The MX130’s lower TDP (30 W versus 75 W) makes it better suited for thin-and-light laptops where thermal headroom is limited.

The GTX 560M wins in memory-bandwidth-heavy scenarios. Its 60.00 GB/s bandwidth versus 40.10 GB/s, combined with a 192-bit bus and 24 ROPs, means it can push pixels and handle large texture sets more efficiently in certain fill-rate-limited situations. The GTX 560M’s higher ROP count (24 versus 8) gives it a theoretical advantage in rasterization at high resolutions, though its lower pixel rate (6.200 GPixel/s versus 9.512 GPixel/s) tempers that benefit. Still, for older games with heavy texture streaming, the wider bus can be a mitigating factor.

The percentile data also tells a story. The MX130 sits at the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, the GTX 560M at the 28th. That means the MX130 outperforms a larger share of the overall GPU pool. For users who want a card that competes against modern low-end parts like the GeForce 940MX or Radeon R7 M440, the MX130 is the better fit. The GTX 560M, by contrast, sits near the GeForce GTS 450 (4893, 0.8% faster) and even the RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4901, 0.9% faster), which suggests its performance class is now entry-level.

The Verdict

The data points one way: the MX130 is the stronger GPU in almost every meaningful metric. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 25.7%, has 53% higher FP32 throughput, double the shader count, a higher texture rate, and does all of this at 30 W versus the GTX 560M’s 75 W. The MX130 also supports Vulkan, giving it broader API compatibility. Its percentile ranking of 32 versus 28 confirms it sits in a higher performance tier.

The GTX 560M retains one advantage: memory bandwidth. At 60.00 GB/s, it offers 50% more bandwidth than the MX130. That could matter in specific legacy titles or workloads that are bandwidth-bound. But its lower compute throughput and higher power draw make it a difficult recommendation in any modern context.

For a laptop user choosing between these two end-of-life parts, the MX130 is the default pick. It delivers better compute performance, better efficiency, and better API support. The GTX 560M only makes sense if the workload is strictly memory-bandwidth-bound and the system can tolerate its 75 W draw. Otherwise, the MX130 is the superior choice, and the benchmark data supports that conclusion without ambiguity.