ATI Radeon X300 SE vs NVS 510

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking923not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.10no data
Power efficiency3.50no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Rage 9 (2003−2006)
GPU code nameGK107RV370
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)1 September 2004 (20 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 cores192no data
Core clock speed797 MHz325 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million107 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm110 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate12.751.300
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-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDR3DDR
Maximum RAM amount2 GB64 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed891 MHz200 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.51 GB/s3.2 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 Connectors4x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)9.0
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA3.0-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 October 2012 1 September 2004
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 64 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 110 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 30 Watt

NVS 510 has an age advantage of 8 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.

ATI X300 SE, on the other hand, has 16.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between NVS 510 and Radeon X300 SE. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that NVS 510 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon X300 SE 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
ATI Radeon X300 SE
Radeon X300 SE

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
2.9 25 votes

Rate Radeon X300 SE 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.