Quadro NVS 160M vs Quadro 3000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking817not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.20no data
Power efficiency2.38no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGF104G98
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date22 February 2011 (13 years ago)15 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$398.96 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 cores2408
Core clock speed450 MHz580 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt12 Watt
Texture fill rate18.004.640
Floating-point processing power0.432 TFLOPS0.0232 TFLOPS
ROPs324
TMUs408

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-I

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB256 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed625 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s11.2 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.11.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

Quadro 3000M 995
+637%
NVS 160M 135

Pros & cons summary


Recency 22 February 2011 15 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 12 Watt

Quadro 3000M has an age advantage of 2 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 62.5% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 160M, on the other hand, has 525% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro 3000M and Quadro NVS 160M. We've got no test results to judge.


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 Quadro 3000M
Quadro 3000M
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M
Quadro NVS 160M

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.


3.8 48 votes

Rate Quadro 3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 23 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 160M 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.