Quadro NVS 140M vs GeForce GTX 1080

Place in the ranking	103	1390
Place by popularity	46	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	19.56	no data
Power efficiency	15.39	1.37
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GP104	G86
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	27 May 2016 (8 years ago)	9 May 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$599	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	2560	16
Core clock speed	1607 MHz	400 MHz
Boost clock speed	1733 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	7,200 million	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	180 Watt	10 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	94 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	277.3	3.200
Floating-point processing power	8.873 TFLOPS	0.0256 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	4
TMUs	160	8

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).

Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	267 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Recommended system power (PSU)	500 Watt	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	no data
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 type	GDDR5X	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	10 GB/s	600 MHz
Memory bandwidth	320 GB/s	9.6 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	DP 1.42, HDMI 2.0b, DL-DVI	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boost	3.0	no data
VR Ready	+	no data
Ansel	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.4	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/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.

GTX 1080 40.38
+20090%

NVS 140M 0.20

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.

GTX 1080 15552
+19838%

NVS 140M 78

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	127 +2017%	6 −2017%
1440p	76	-0−1
4K	57	-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p	4.72	no data
1440p	7.88	no data
4K	10.51	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

70−75
+3450%

2−3

−3450%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	92 +2967%	3−4 −2967%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	65−70	0−1
Battlefield 5	145	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	105 +5150%	2−3 −5150%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +3450%	2−3 −3450%
Far Cry 5	123	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	135	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	320 +31900%	1−2 −31900%
Hitman 3	85−90 +2050%	4−5 −2050%
Horizon Zero Dawn	160−170 +1988%	8−9 −1988%
Metro Exodus	144	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	114	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	186 +4550%	4−5 −4550%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +364%	27−30 −364%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	137 +4467%	3−4 −4467%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	65−70	0−1
Battlefield 5	128	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	95 +4650%	2−3 −4650%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +3450%	2−3 −3450%
Far Cry 5	98	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	105	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	291 +29000%	1−2 −29000%
Hitman 3	85−90 +2050%	4−5 −2050%
Horizon Zero Dawn	160−170 +1988%	8−9 −1988%
Metro Exodus	131	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	109	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	140−150 +3600%	4−5 −3600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	152 +1589%	9−10 −1589%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +364%	27−30 −364%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	63 +2000%	3−4 −2000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	65−70	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	71 +3450%	2−3 −3450%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +3450%	2−3 −3450%
Far Cry 5	75	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	112	0−1
Hitman 3	85−90 +2050%	4−5 −2050%
Horizon Zero Dawn	121 +1413%	8−9 −1413%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	140−150 +3600%	4−5 −3600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	81 +800%	9−10 −800%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +364%	27−30 −364%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

105

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	89	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	74	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	49	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	45−50	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	51	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35	0−1
Far Cry 5	53	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	282 +28100%	1−2 −28100%
Hitman 3	50−55 +767%	6−7 −767%
Horizon Zero Dawn	92 +4500%	2−3 −4500%
Metro Exodus	82	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	95−100	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	190−200	0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

81
+3950%

2−3

−3950%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	43	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	39	0−1
Hitman 3	30−35	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	180−190	0−1
Metro Exodus	47	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	56	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	33 +3200%	1−2 −3200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24−27	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	29	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16	0−1
Far Cry 5	27	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	65	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	55−60	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	21−24	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

42
+2000%

2−3

−2000%

This is how GTX 1080 and NVS 140M compete in popular games:

GTX 1080 is 2017% 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 GTX 1080 is 5150% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, GTX 1080 surpassed NVS 140M in all 29 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	40.38	0.20
Recency	27 May 2016	9 May 2007
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	16 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	180 Watt	10 Watt

GTX 1080 has a 20090% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 400% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 140M, on the other hand, has 1700% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1080 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 140M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1080 is a desktop card while Quadro NVS 140M 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.