
GeForce GTX 560M
Popular choices:

Quadro 4000M
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GeForce GTX 560M
2011Why buy it
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (3 GB vs 2 GB).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 100W, a 25W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) on 40nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2011-era hardware with 3 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
Quadro 4000M
2011Why buy it
- ✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 3 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2011-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌33.3% higher power demand at 100W vs 75W.
GeForce GTX 560M
2011Quadro 4000M
2011Why buy it
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (3 GB vs 2 GB).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 100W, a 25W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) on 40nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Why buy it
- ✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2011-era hardware with 3 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 3 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2011-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌33.3% higher power demand at 100W vs 75W.
Quick Answers
So, is Quadro 4000M better than GeForce GTX 560M?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does GeForce GTX 560M make more sense than Quadro 4000M?
Games Benchmarks
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 560M | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 21 FPS | 51 FPS |
| medium | 13 FPS | 41 FPS |
| high | 7 FPS | 25 FPS |
| ultra | 4 FPS | 15 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 9 FPS | 28 FPS |
| medium | 5 FPS | 21 FPS |
| high | 2 FPS | 12 FPS |
| ultra | 1 FPS | 7 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 4 FPS | 11 FPS |
| medium | 2 FPS | 9 FPS |
| high | 1 FPS | 5 FPS |
| ultra | 1 FPS | 5 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 560M | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 39 FPS | 58 FPS |
| medium | 20 FPS | 46 FPS |
| high | 14 FPS | 39 FPS |
| ultra | 10 FPS | 29 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 12 FPS | 43 FPS |
| medium | 7 FPS | 30 FPS |
| high | 5 FPS | 20 FPS |
| ultra | 4 FPS | 16 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 4 FPS | 18 FPS |
| medium | 2 FPS | 12 FPS |
| high | 2 FPS | 9 FPS |
| ultra | 1 FPS | 6 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 560M | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 58 FPS | 58 FPS |
| medium | 46 FPS | 46 FPS |
| high | 38 FPS | 39 FPS |
| ultra | 29 FPS | 29 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 43 FPS | 43 FPS |
| medium | 35 FPS | 35 FPS |
| high | 29 FPS | 29 FPS |
| ultra | 22 FPS | 22 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 29 FPS | 29 FPS |
| medium | 23 FPS | 23 FPS |
| high | 19 FPS | 19 FPS |
| ultra | 14 FPS | 14 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 560M | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 53 FPS | 58 FPS |
| medium | 40 FPS | 46 FPS |
| high | 23 FPS | 39 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 29 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 6 FPS | 15 FPS |
| medium | 4 FPS | 13 FPS |
| high | 3 FPS | 11 FPS |
| ultra | 2 FPS | 9 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 4 FPS | 11 FPS |
| medium | 2 FPS | 8 FPS |
| high | 2 FPS | 7 FPS |
| ultra | 1 FPS | 5 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 560M and Quadro 4000M

GeForce GTX 560M
GeForce GTX 560M
The GeForce GTX 560M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 30 2011. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 775 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,281 points.

Quadro 4000M
Quadro 4000M
The Quadro 4000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 22 2011. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 475 MHz. It has 336 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,287 points. Launch price was $449.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 560M scores 1,281 and the Quadro 4000M reaches 1,287 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 560M is built on Fermi 2.0 while the Quadro 4000M uses Fermi, both on a 40 nm process. Shader units: 192 (GeForce GTX 560M) vs 336 (Quadro 4000M). Raw compute: 0.5952 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 560M) vs 0.6384 TFLOPS (Quadro 4000M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560M | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,281 | 1,287 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Fermi |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 336+75% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.5952 TFLOPS | 0.6384 TFLOPS+7% |
| ROPs | 24 | 32+33% |
| TMUs | 32 | 56+75% |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | 448 KB+75% |
| L2 Cache | 384 KB | 512 KB+33% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce GTX 560M gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Quadro 4000M relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560M | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 560M comes with 3 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro 4000M has 2 GB. The GeForce GTX 560M offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 384 KB (GeForce GTX 560M) vs 512 KB (Quadro 4000M) — the Quadro 4000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560M | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 3 GB+50% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 384 KB | 512 KB+33% |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 560M draws 75W versus the Quadro 4000M's 100W — a 28.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 560M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 560M) vs 350W (Quadro 4000M). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 560M | Quadro 4000M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-25% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 17.1+33% | 12.9 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













