Quadro NVS 5100M vs GeForce GT 750M

Place in the ranking	725	1121
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	4.81	1.85
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	GT2xx (2010)
GPU code name	GK107	N10P-NS
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	9 January 2013 (11 years ago)	7 January 2010 (14 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	384	48
Core clock speed	941 MHz	550 MHz
Boost clock speed	967 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,270 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	35 Watt
Texture fill rate	30.94	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.7427 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	32	no data

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	medium sized
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	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	DDR3	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Standard memory configuration	DDR3/GDDR5	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1003 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	64.19 GB/s	no data
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 data
eDP 1.2 signal support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
LVDS signal support	Up to 1920x1200	no data
VGA аnalog display support	Up to 2048x1536	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP content protection	+	-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	+	-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	+	-

Supported technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Support	+	-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
3D Vision / 3DTV Play	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	10.1
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.5	no data
OpenCL	1.1	no data
Vulkan	1.1.126	-
CUDA	+	-

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 750M 3.45
+271%

NVS 5100M 0.93

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 750M 9618
+265%

NVS 5100M 2634

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:

Full HD

20
+300%

5−6

−300%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7
+100%

3−4

−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Battlefield 5	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Far Cry 5	7−8	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 +350%	2−3 −350%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +280%	5−6 −280%
Hitman 3	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 +108%	12−14 −108%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +100%	7−8 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +32.3%	30−35 −32.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Battlefield 5	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Far Cry 5	7−8	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 +350%	2−3 −350%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +280%	5−6 −280%
Hitman 3	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 +108%	12−14 −108%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +100%	7−8 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30 +200%	10−11 −200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +32.3%	30−35 −32.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Far Cry 5	7−8	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +280%	5−6 −280%
Hitman 3	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 +108%	12−14 −108%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +100%	7−8 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5 −100%	10−11 +100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +32.3%	30−35 −32.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
+800%

1−2

−800%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	21−24 +600%	3−4 −600%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+133%

3−4

−133%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3	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	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+100%

2−3

−100%

This is how GT 750M and NVS 5100M compete in popular games:

GT 750M is 300% faster in 1080p

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

in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 750M is 800% faster.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the NVS 5100M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GT 750M is ahead in 37 tests (97%)
NVS 5100M is ahead in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.45	0.93
Recency	9 January 2013	7 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	35 Watt

GT 750M has a 271% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 5100M, on the other hand, has 42.9% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 750M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 5100M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 750M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro NVS 5100M 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.