Radeon RX 6500 XT vs NVS 310

Place in the ranking	1186	218
Place by popularity	not in top-100	85
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.01	58.33
Power efficiency	2.25	16.04
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GF119	Navi 24
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	26 June 2012 (12 years ago)	19 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$159	$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6500 XT has 583200% better value for money than NVS 310.

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	48	1024
Core clock speed	523 MHz	2610 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2815 MHz
Number of transistors	292 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	107 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.184	180.2
Floating-point processing power	0.1004 TFLOPS	5.765 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	32
TMUs	8	64
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	16

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Length	156 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 6-pin

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	8 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	875 MHz	2248 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14 GB/s	143.9 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

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	2x DisplayPort	1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	2.1	-

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.

NVS 310 0.65

RX 6500 XT 24.80
+3715%

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.

NVS 310 251

RX 6500 XT 9565
+3711%

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	1−2 −6200%	63 +6200%
1440p	0−1	30
4K	-0−1	17

Cost per frame, $

1080p	159.00	3.16
1440p	no data	6.63
4K	no data	11.71

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	51 +0%	51 +0%
Battlefield 5	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	54 +0%	54 +0%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Hitman 3	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Metro Exodus	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	43 +0%	43 +0%
Battlefield 5	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	34 +0%	34 +0%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Hitman 3	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Metro Exodus	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	107 +0%	107 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	31 +0%	31 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	30 +0%	30 +0%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Hitman 3	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	92 +0%	92 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	83 +0%	83 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	54 +0%	54 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	25 +0%	25 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

60−65

+0%

60−65

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	23 +0%	23 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	17 +0%	17 +0%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Hitman 3	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	66 +0%	66 +0%
Metro Exodus	57 +0%	57 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	56 +0%	56 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

40−45

+0%

40−45

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Hitman 3	10 +0%	10 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	28 +0%	28 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6 +0%	6 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4 +0%	4 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	25 +0%	25 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10 +0%	10 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

21−24

+0%

21−24

+0%

This is how NVS 310 and RX 6500 XT compete in popular games:

RX 6500 XT is 6200% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.65	24.80
Recency	26 June 2012	19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	8 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	107 Watt

NVS 310 has 435% lower power consumption.

RX 6500 XT, on the other hand, has a 3715.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6500 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 310 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 310 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6500 XT is a desktop one.

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