AMD
Radeon R7 265 vs GeForce GTX 560
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GTX 560
Aggregate performance score
We've compared R7 265 and GTX 560 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗R7 265 outperforms GTX 560 by ~6% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+6%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: Radeon R7 265 (~4%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider R7 265
- Higher catalog performance index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.2 · Not supported
Reasons to consider GTX 560
- Lower recorded market price
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 2.1 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
AMD
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3432
7671
100100
5656
Graphics card ranking
Positions 195–200of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce GTX 560
150 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
GeForce GTX 560
Price $20.00Based on catalog performance per unit of current market price, not measured FPS.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
34Better
32
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
31Better
29
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
28Better
27
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
76Better
71
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
49Better
47
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
DisplayPort
HDMI
Device class
Max monitors
Max resolution
USB Type-C
TFLOPSBetter
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
Power consumption
Length
Thickness
Launch price
Memory type
Power connector
Release date
ArchitectureBetter
Compute API
Shader units / coresBetter
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory bus
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumption
Process nodeBetter
Recommended PSU
Die sizeBetter
Memory cache
Transistor countBetter
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares R7 265 and GTX 560 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
R7 265GTX 560
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
173 FPS
160 FPS
1080p Ultra
118 FPS
109 FPS
1440p Ultra
64 FPS
62 FPS
4K Ultra
23 FPS
23 FPS
Counter-Strike 2R7 265173 FPSGTX 560160 FPSR7 265118 FPSGTX 560109 FPSR7 26564 FPSGTX 56062 FPSR7 26523 FPSGTX 56023 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077R7 265111 FPSGTX 560103 FPSR7 26593 FPSGTX 56086 FPSR7 26546 FPSGTX 56045 FPSR7 26516 FPSGTX 56015 FPS
Forza Horizon 5R7 265140 FPSGTX 560130 FPSR7 26588 FPSGTX 56082 FPSR7 26558 FPSGTX 56056 FPSR7 26534 FPSGTX 56034 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyR7 26591 FPSGTX 56084 FPSR7 26574 FPSGTX 56068 FPSR7 26542 FPSGTX 56040 FPSR7 26516 FPSGTX 56016 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 10034326%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 10037356%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 10040393%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 10056560%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 10076717%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 10044432%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 10043415%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 10040393%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10046452%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10040393%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX11.111.0
Vulkan1.2Vulkan 1.2 (driver support)
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingNot supportedNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 1.2OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 2.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureGCN 1.0Fermi 2.0Better
Process node28 nmBetter40 nm
Release date20142011
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count2800 millionBetter1950 million
Die size212 mm²Better332 mm²
Shader units / cores1024Better336
Base clock900 MHzBetter810 MHz
Boost clock900 MHzBetter810 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3x16PCIe 2x16
Length210 mm210 mm
ThicknessDual-slotDual-slot
Recommended PSU450 W450 W
Power connector6 pin6+6 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMIHDMI 1.4amini-HDMI 1.3a
DisplayPortDisplayPort 1.2Board dependent
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitors43
Max resolution4096 × 21602560 × 1600
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM2 GB GDDR5Better1 GB GDDR5
Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5
Memory bus256 bit256 bit
TFLOPS1.894Better1.089
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 70
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (6)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (4)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: R7 265 or GTX 560?+
R7 265 has the higher overall gaming score, while R7 265 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GTX 560 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GTX 560 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
R7 265 offers more overall performance, while R7 265 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GTX 560 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
R7 265 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
R7 265 leads in combined 1440p performance. R7 265 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
R7 265 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
R7 265 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
R7 265 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to R7 265 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.