Quadro P520 vs NVS 5400M

Place in the ranking	973	630
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	3.15	20.61
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	GF108	GP108
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	1 June 2012 (12 years ago)	23 May 2019 (5 years ago)

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	96	384
Core clock speed	660 MHz	1303 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1493 MHz
Number of transistors	585 million	1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	18 Watt
Texture fill rate	10.56	35.83
Floating-point processing power	0.2534 TFLOPS	1.147 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	16
TMUs	16	24

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).

Laptop size	medium sized	large
Interface	MXM	PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	GDDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth	28.8 GB/s	48.06 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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

No outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	+	6.1

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.

NVS 5400M 1.39

Quadro P520 4.68
+237%

Other tests
- Passmark
- 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
- 3DMark Vantage Performance
- GeekBench 5 OpenCL

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 5400M 623

Quadro P520 2093
+236%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

NVS 5400M 1119

Quadro P520 4186
+274%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

NVS 5400M 5198

Quadro P520 15720
+202%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

NVS 5400M 2114

Quadro P520 7934
+275%

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 HD	17 −23.5%	21 +23.5%
4K	5−6 −300%	20 +300%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset
Full HD
Medium Preset
Full HD
High Preset
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Full HD
Epic Preset
1440p
High Preset
1440p
Ultra Preset
1440p
Epic Preset
4K
High Preset
4K
Ultra Preset
4K
Epic Preset
Full HD
Low Preset
Full HD
Medium Preset
Full HD
High Preset
1440p
High Preset
1440p
Ultra Preset
4K
High Preset
4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −233%	10−11 +233%
Hogwarts Legacy	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%

Battlefield 5	3−4 −600%	21−24 +600%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −233%	10−11 +233%
Far Cry 5	0−1	20
Fortnite	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −188%	21−24 +188%
Forza Horizon 5	0−1	12−14
Hogwarts Legacy	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10−11 −100%	20−22 +100%
Valorant	35−40 −77.1%	60−65 +77.1%

Battlefield 5	3−4 −600%	21−24 +600%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	30−35 −164%	85−90 +164%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −233%	10−11 +233%
Dota 2	18−20 −233%	60 +233%
Far Cry 5	0−1	18
Fortnite	5−6 −500%	30−33 +500%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −188%	21−24 +188%
Forza Horizon 5	0−1	12−14
Grand Theft Auto V	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Hogwarts Legacy	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −200%	6 +200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10−11 −100%	20−22 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −217%	19 +217%
Valorant	35−40 −77.1%	60−65 +77.1%

Battlefield 5	3−4 −600%	21−24 +600%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −233%	10−11 +233%
Dota 2	18−20 −200%	54 +200%
Far Cry 5	0−1	16
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −188%	21−24 +188%
Hogwarts Legacy	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10−11 −100%	20−22 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −83.3%	11 +83.3%
Valorant	35−40 −77.1%	60−65 +77.1%

Fortnite

5−6

−500%

30−33
+500%

Counter-Strike 2	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	10−11 −290%	35−40 +290%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 −150%	35−40 +150%
Valorant	8−9 −600%	55−60 +600%

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Hogwarts Legacy	0−1	5−6
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%

Fortnite

3−4

−233%

10−11
+233%

Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −13.3%	16−18 +13.3%
Valorant	8−9 −225%	24−27 +225%

Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	1−2
Dota 2	2−3 −1050%	23 +1050%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%

Fortnite

3−4

−66.7%

5−6
+66.7%

Counter-Strike 2

21−24

+0%

21−24

+0%

Counter-Strike 2

21−24

+0%

21−24

+0%

Counter-Strike 2

21−24

+0%

21−24

+0%

Grand Theft Auto V	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

Battlefield 5

5−6

+0%

5−6

+0%

Hogwarts Legacy	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Hogwarts Legacy	0−1	0−1

This is how NVS 5400M and Quadro P520 compete in popular games:

Quadro P520 is 24% faster in 1080p
Quadro P520 is 300% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P520 is 1050% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Quadro P520 is ahead in 45 tests (83%)
there's a draw in 9 tests (17%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.39	4.68
Recency	1 June 2012	23 May 2019
Chip lithography	40 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	18 Watt

Quadro P520 has a 236.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 94.4% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P520 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 5400M in performance tests.