GMA X4500 vs NVS 510

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking920not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.10no data
Power efficiency3.57no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 5.0 (2008)
GPU code nameGK107Eaglelake
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)1 June 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 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 cores19280
Core clock speed797 MHz533 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rate12.752.132
Floating-point processing power0.306 TFLOPSno data
ROPs164
TMUs164

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 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length160 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 amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed891 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth28.51 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 Connectors4x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)10.0
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA3.0-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 October 2012 1 June 2008
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 13 Watt

NVS 510 has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

GMA X4500, on the other hand, has 169.2% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between NVS 510 and GMA X4500. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that NVS 510 is a workstation graphics card while GMA X4500 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 510
NVS 510
Intel GMA X4500
GMA X4500

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.


2.9 60 votes

Rate NVS 510 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 330 votes

Rate GMA X4500 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.