Quadro NVS 510M vs FirePro M2000

Place in the ranking	1085	1201
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	2.32	1.22
Architecture	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)	Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code name	Turks	G71
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	1 July 2012 (12 years ago)	21 August 2006 (18 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	480	no data
Core clock speed	500 MHz	450 MHz
Number of transistors	716 million	278 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	33 Watt	35 Watt
Texture fill rate	12.00	10.80
Floating-point processing power	0.48 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	8	16
TMUs	24	24

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	n/a	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 1.0 x16
Form factor	chip-down	no data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	256 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	600 MHz
Memory bandwidth	25.6 GB/s	19.2 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
StereoOutput3D	+	-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model	5.0	3.0
OpenGL	4.4	2.1
OpenCL	1.2	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FirePro M2000 1.11
+79%

NVS 510M 0.62

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

FirePro M2000 425
+78.6%

NVS 510M 238

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p	9 +80%	5−6 −80%
Full HD	14 +100%	7−8 −100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Dota 2	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Fortnite	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Grand Theft Auto V	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
World of Tanks	24−27 +108%	12−14 −108%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Dota 2	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
World of Tanks	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Valorant	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Dota 2	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Far Cry 5	0−1	0−1
Valorant	1−2	0−1

This is how FirePro M2000 and NVS 510M compete in popular games:

FirePro M2000 is 80% faster in 900p
FirePro M2000 is 100% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.11	0.62
Recency	1 July 2012	21 August 2006
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	256 MB
Chip lithography	40 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	33 Watt	35 Watt

FirePro M2000 has a 79% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 125% more advanced lithography process, and 6.1% lower power consumption.

The FirePro M2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 510M in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.