Radeon R7 Graphics vs NVS 315

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1122not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.03no data
Power efficiency3.30no data
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameGF119Spectre
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date10 March 2013 (11 years ago)11 January 2014 (10 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 cores48512
Core clock speed523 MHz720 MHz
Boost clock speedno data980 MHz
Number of transistors292 million2,410 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)19 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate4.18431.36
Floating-point processing power0.1004 TFLOPS1.004 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs832

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16IGP
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed875 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth14 GB/sno 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 Connectors1x DMS-59No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.0
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 10 March 2013 11 January 2014
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 19 Watt 15 Watt

R7 Graphics has an age advantage of 10 months, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 26.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between NVS 315 and Radeon R7 Graphics. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that NVS 315 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R7 Graphics is a desktop 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 NVS 315
NVS 315
AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
Radeon R7 Graphics

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.


3.4 179 votes

Rate NVS 315 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 1377 votes

Rate Radeon R7 Graphics 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.