Quadro NVS 160M vs GeForce GT 555M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 555M with Quadro NVS 160M, including specs and performance data.

GT 555M
2011
3 GB DDR3\DDR5, 35 Watt
1.70
+386%

GT 555M outperforms NVS 160M by a whopping 386% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking9341289
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.332.00
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGF106G98
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date27 October 2011 (13 years ago)15 August 2008 (16 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 coresUp to 1448
Core clock speedUp to 753 MHz580 MHz
Boost clock speed753 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,170 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt12 Watt
Texture fill rate12.604.640
Floating-point processing power0.3024 TFLOPS0.0232 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs248

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-I
SLI options+-

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 typeDDR3\DDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount3 GB256 MB
Memory bus widthUp to 192 bit/128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 1569 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 50.2 GB/s11.2 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

3D Blu-Ray+-
3D Gaming+-
Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+1.1

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.

GT 555M 1.70
+386%
NVS 160M 0.35

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.

GT 555M 654
+384%
NVS 160M 135

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:

900p19
+533%
3−4
−533%
Full HD25
+400%
5−6
−400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Hitman 3 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+21.4%
27−30
−21.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Hitman 3 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+21.4%
27−30
−21.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Hitman 3 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+21.4%
27−30
−21.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

This is how GT 555M and NVS 160M compete in popular games:

  • GT 555M is 533% faster in 900p
  • GT 555M is 400% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 555M is 150% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GT 555M surpassed NVS 160M in all 29 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.70 0.35
Recency 27 October 2011 15 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 12 Watt

GT 555M has a 385.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 62.5% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 160M, on the other hand, has 191.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 555M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 160M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 555M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro NVS 160M is a mobile workstation one.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M
GeForce GT 555M
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M
Quadro NVS 160M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 192 votes

Rate GeForce GT 555M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 23 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 160M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.