Radeon Pro W6800 vs NVS 810

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
NVS 810 Quadro K620 Quadro K1200 Quadro K2200 Tesla M10
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Radeon Pro V620 Radeon Pro W6800 Radeon Pro W6800X Radeon Pro W6800X Duo Radeon Pro W6900X

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 810 and Radeon Pro W6800, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

NVS 810
2015
2 GB DDR3, 68 Watt
3.09

Pro W6800 outperforms NVS 810 by a whopping 1564% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

NVS 810 NVS 810
Pro W6800 Pro W6800

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking76453
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data23.64
Power efficiency3.1114.09
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGM107Navi 21
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date4 November 2015 (9 years ago)8 June 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,249

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 cores5123840
Core clock speed902 MHz2075 MHz
Boost clock speed1033 MHz2320 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)68 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate33.06556.8
Floating-point processing power1.058 TFLOPS17.82 TFLOPS
ROPs1696
TMUs32240
Ray Tracing Coresno data60

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 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length198 mm267 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin + 1x 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 GB32 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s512.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors8x mini-DisplayPort6x mini-DisplayPort

API 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
Vulkan1.1.1261.2
CUDA5.0-

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

NVS 810 3.09
Pro W6800 51.41
+1564%

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 810 1190
Pro W6800 19814
+1565%

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 HD9−10
−1622%
155
+1622%
1440p7−8
−1800%
133
+1800%
4K5−6
−1880%
99
+1880%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data14.51
1440pno data16.91
4Kno data22.72

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Hitman 3 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Metro Exodus 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Hitman 3 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Metro Exodus 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 277
+0%
277
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Hitman 3 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 225
+0%
225
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 268
+0%
268
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 157
+0%
157
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Hitman 3 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 179
+0%
179
+0%
Metro Exodus 55
+0%
55
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 212
+0%
212
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hitman 3 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 99
+0%
99
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 126
+0%
126
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

This is how NVS 810 and Pro W6800 compete in popular games:

  • Pro W6800 is 1622% faster in 1080p
  • Pro W6800 is 1800% faster in 1440p
  • Pro W6800 is 1880% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 3.09 51.41
Recency 4 November 2015 8 June 2021
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 68 Watt 250 Watt

NVS 810 has 267.6% lower power consumption.

Pro W6800, on the other hand, has a 1563.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W6800 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 810 in performance tests.

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 810
NVS 810
AMD Radeon Pro W6800
Radeon Pro W6800
Like
Like

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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

NVS 810 NVS 810
vs
FireStream 9250 FireStream 9250
Pro W6800 Radeon Pro W6800
vs
Quadro GV100 Quadro GV100
NVS 810 NVS 810
vs
FX 5800 Quadro FX 5800
FirePro W5000 FirePro W5000
vs
RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102
FirePro V4900 FirePro V4900
vs
HD 6570M Radeon HD 6570M
Quadro P600 Quadro P600
vs
UHD Graphics G1 32EU Mobile UHD Graphics G1 32EU Mobile
Tesla P40 Tesla P40
vs
RX 6300 Radeon RX 6300
Tesla M4 Tesla M4
vs
T400 4 GB T400 4 GB
Quadro M5000 Quadro M5000
vs
Pro 555X Radeon Pro 555X
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
RX 6800 Radeon RX 6800
Quadro K4200 Quadro K4200
vs
RX 5700M Radeon RX 5700M
K2000D Quadro K2000D
vs
HD 7570 Radeon HD 7570
Quadro K4000 Quadro K4000
vs
FX 880M Quadro FX 880M

Community ratings

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

3.3 8 votes

Rate NVS 810 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 82 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W6800 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.