Radeon RX 6650 XT vs NVS 510

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GRID K1 GRID K100 GRID K140Q GRID K160Q GRID K340 NVS 510 NVS 1000 Quadro 410 Quadro K420 Quadro K600 Quadro K2000 Quadro K2000D
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Radeon RX 5800 Radeon RX 5800 XT Radeon RX 6600 Radeon RX 6600 LE Radeon RX 6600 XT Radeon RX 6650 XT

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 510 with Radeon RX 6650 XT, including specs and performance data.

NVS 510
2012
2 GB DDR3, 35 Watt
1.54

RX 6650 XT outperforms NVS 510 by a whopping 2394% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

NVS 510 NVS 510
RX 6650 XT RX 6650 XT

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking93484
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1062.76
Power efficiency3.5017.38
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGK107Navi 23
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)10 May 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 $399

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

RX 6650 XT has 62660% better value for money than NVS 510.

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 cores1922048
Core clock speed797 MHz2055 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2635 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt176 Watt
Texture fill rate12.75337.3
Floating-point processing power0.306 TFLOPS10.79 TFLOPS
ROPs1664
TMUs16128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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 4.0 x8
Length160 mmno data
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 8-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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed891 MHz2190 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.51 GB/s280.3 GB/s
Resizable BAR-+

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-DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA3.0-

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.

NVS 510 1.54
RX 6650 XT 38.41
+2394%

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 510 687
RX 6650 XT 17174
+2400%

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 HD5−6
−2680%
139
+2680%
1440p2−3
−3350%
69
+3350%
4K1−2
−3600%
37
+3600%

Cost per frame, $

1080p89.80
−3028%
2.87
+3028%
1440p224.50
−3782%
5.78
+3782%
4K449.00
−4064%
10.78
+4064%
  • RX 6650 XT has 3028% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX 6650 XT has 3782% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX 6650 XT has 4064% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 212
+0%
212
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 346
+0%
346
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 128
+0%
128
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 153
+0%
153
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 342
+0%
342
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 108
+0%
108
+0%
Far Cry 5 173
+0%
173
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 198
+0%
198
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 89
+0%
89
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 181
+0%
181
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 88
+0%
88
+0%
Dota 2 171
+0%
171
+0%
Far Cry 5 163
+0%
163
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 180
+0%
180
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 147
+0%
147
+0%
Metro Exodus 102
+0%
102
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 182
+0%
182
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
+0%
78
+0%
Dota 2 136
+0%
136
+0%
Far Cry 5 151
+0%
151
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 107
+0%
107
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 108
+0%
108
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 280−290
+0%
280−290
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 77
+0%
77
+0%
Metro Exodus 58
+0%
58
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 44
+0%
44
+0%
Far Cry 5 114
+0%
114
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 72
+0%
72
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 56
+0%
56
+0%
Valorant 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Dota 2 97
+0%
97
+0%
Far Cry 5 55
+0%
55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

This is how NVS 510 and RX 6650 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6650 XT is 2680% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6650 XT is 3350% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6650 XT is 3600% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 1.54 38.41
Recency 23 October 2012 10 May 2022
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 176 Watt

NVS 510 has 402.9% lower power consumption.

RX 6650 XT, on the other hand, has a 2394.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6650 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 510 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 510 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6650 XT is a desktop one.

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
AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT
Radeon RX 6650 XT
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

NVS 510 NVS 510
vs
FX 4700 X2 Quadro FX 4700 X2
RX 6650 XT Radeon RX 6650 XT
vs
RX 7600 XT Radeon RX 7600 XT
NVS 510 NVS 510
vs
GRID K140Q GRID K140Q
RX 570 X2 RX 570 X2
vs
NVS 510 NVS 510
RTX 3090 Ti RTX 3090 Ti
vs
NVS 510 NVS 510
RTX A2000 12 GB RTX A2000 12 GB
vs
NVS 510 NVS 510
Radeon 680M 680M
vs
NVS 510 NVS 510
Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Iris Xe Graphics 80EU
vs
NVS 510 NVS 510
H100 PCIe H100 PCIe
vs
NVS 510 NVS 510
Arc Pro A50 Arc Pro A50
vs
NVS 510 NVS 510
Arc A750 Arc A750
vs
NVS 510 NVS 510
RTX 3060 8 GB RTX 3060 8 GB
vs
NVS 510 NVS 510
RTX 4070 Ti RTX 4070 Ti
vs
NVS 510 NVS 510

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

2.9 61 vote

Rate NVS 510 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 3613 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6650 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about NVS 510 or Radeon RX 6650 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.