Radeon RX 7800 XT vs NVS 810

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 810 with Radeon RX 7800 XT, including specs and performance data.

NVS 810
2015
2 GB DDR3, 68 Watt
3.09

RX 7800 XT outperforms NVS 810 by a whopping 1933% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking77433
Place by popularitynot in top-10066
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data67.97
Power efficiency3.1216.38
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025)
GPU code nameGM107Navi 32
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date4 November 2015 (9 years ago)25 August 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

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 cores512 ×23840
Core clock speed902 MHz1295 MHz
Boost clock speed1033 MHz2430 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)68 Watt263 Watt
Texture fill rate33.06 ×2583.2
Floating-point processing power1.058 TFLOPS ×237.32 TFLOPS
ROPs16 ×296
TMUs32 ×2240
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 connectorsNone2x 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 GB ×216 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit ×2256 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz2438 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s ×2624.1 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-DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1
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 Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
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.

NVS 810 3.09
RX 7800 XT 62.81
+1933%

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
RX 7800 XT 24200
+1934%

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 HD10−12
−2060%
216
+2060%
1440p6−7
−1967%
124
+1967%
4K3−4
−2267%
71
+2267%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.31
1440pno data4.02
4Kno data7.03

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 324
+0%
324
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 241
+0%
241
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 248
+0%
248
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 243
+0%
243
+0%
Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 200
+0%
200
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 196
+0%
196
+0%
Far Cry 5 204
+0%
204
+0%
Fortnite 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 278
+0%
278
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 276
+0%
276
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 145
+0%
145
+0%
Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 163
+0%
163
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 163
+0%
163
+0%
Far Cry 5 196
+0%
196
+0%
Fortnite 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 261
+0%
261
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 256
+0%
256
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 178
+0%
178
+0%
Metro Exodus 172
+0%
172
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 366
+0%
366
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 149
+0%
149
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 150
+0%
150
+0%
Far Cry 5 182
+0%
182
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 222
+0%
222
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 200
+0%
200
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 140
+0%
140
+0%
Metro Exodus 106
+0%
106
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 99
+0%
99
+0%
Far Cry 5 176
+0%
176
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 202
+0%
202
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 147
+0%
147
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 152
+0%
152
+0%
Metro Exodus 63
+0%
63
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 118
+0%
118
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21
+0%
21
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45
+0%
45
+0%
Far Cry 5 104
+0%
104
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 164
+0%
164
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

This is how NVS 810 and RX 7800 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 7800 XT is 2060% faster in 1080p
  • RX 7800 XT is 1967% faster in 1440p
  • RX 7800 XT is 2267% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.09 62.81
Recency 4 November 2015 25 August 2023
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 68 Watt 263 Watt

NVS 810 has 286.8% lower power consumption.

RX 7800 XT, on the other hand, has a 1932.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7800 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 810 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 810 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 7800 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 810
NVS 810
AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT
Radeon RX 7800 XT

Other comparisons

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.


3.3 8 votes

Rate NVS 810 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 3411 votes

Rate Radeon RX 7800 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about NVS 810 or Radeon RX 7800 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.