Radeon E6460 vs NVS 315

Place in the ranking	1124	1139
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.03	no data
Power efficiency	3.30	2.34
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code name	GF119	Caicos
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	10 March 2013 (11 years ago)	7 April 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$159	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	48	160
Core clock speed	523 MHz	600 MHz
Number of transistors	292 million	370 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	19 Watt	25 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.184	4.800
Floating-point processing power	0.1004 TFLOPS	0.192 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	4
TMUs	8	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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	145 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	875 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14 GB/s	25.6 GB/s

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

1x DMS-59

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.0
OpenGL	4.6	4.4
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
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 315 0.90
+7.1%

Radeon E6460 0.84

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 315 346
+7.1%

Radeon E6460 323

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.90	0.84
Recency	10 March 2013	7 April 2011
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	512 MB
Power consumption (TDP)	19 Watt	25 Watt

NVS 315 has a 7.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 31.6% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between NVS 315 and Radeon E6460.

Be aware that NVS 315 is a workstation card while Radeon E6460 is a notebook one.

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