NVS 315 vs Quadro M5000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M5000M with NVS 315, including specs and performance data.

M5000M
2015
8 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
15.67
+1935%

M5000M outperforms NVS 315 by a whopping 1935% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3211144
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.07
Power efficiency12.443.22
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGM204GF119
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date18 August 2015 (9 years ago)10 March 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$159

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 cores1,53648
Core clock speed975 MHz523 MHz
Boost clock speed1051 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,200 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt19 Watt
Texture fill rate93.604.184
Floating-point processing power2.995 TFLOPS0.1004 TFLOPS
ROPs644
TMUs968

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
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Widthno data1-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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount8 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz875 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s14 GB/s
Shared memory-no 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DMS-59
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA5.22.1

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.

M5000M 15.67
+1935%
NVS 315 0.77

  • Other tests
    • Passmark
    • 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.

M5000M 7002
+1924%
NVS 315 346

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.

M5000M 22785
+2483%
NVS 315 882

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 HD84
+2000%
4−5
−2000%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data39.75

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
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+2325%
4−5
−2325%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+3500%
1−2
−3500%
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+2300%
3−4
−2300%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+2325%
4−5
−2325%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+3500%
1−2
−3500%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+2800%
2−3
−2800%
Fortnite 90−95
+2225%
4−5
−2225%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+2233%
3−4
−2233%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+2600%
2−3
−2600%
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+2033%
3−4
−2033%
Valorant 130−140
+2117%
6−7
−2117%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+2300%
3−4
−2300%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+2325%
4−5
−2325%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+2060%
10−11
−2060%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+3500%
1−2
−3500%
Dota 2 100−110
+2425%
4−5
−2425%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+2800%
2−3
−2800%
Fortnite 90−95
+2225%
4−5
−2225%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+2233%
3−4
−2233%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+2600%
2−3
−2600%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
+2033%
3−4
−2033%
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+3500%
1−2
−3500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+2033%
3−4
−2033%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 67
+2133%
3−4
−2133%
Valorant 130−140
+2117%
6−7
−2117%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+2300%
3−4
−2300%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+3500%
1−2
−3500%
Dota 2 100−110
+2425%
4−5
−2425%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+2800%
2−3
−2800%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+2233%
3−4
−2233%
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+2033%
3−4
−2033%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 38
+3700%
1−2
−3700%
Valorant 130−140
+2117%
6−7
−2117%
Fortnite 90−95
+2225%
4−5
−2225%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+3400%
1−2
−3400%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+1983%
6−7
−1983%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+2800%
1−2
−2800%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+2214%
7−8
−2214%
Valorant 160−170
+1988%
8−9
−1988%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+2300%
2−3
−2300%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18 0−1
Far Cry 5 35−40
+3700%
1−2
−3700%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+2050%
2−3
−2050%
Hogwarts Legacy 18−20 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+2700%
1−2
−2700%
Fortnite 35−40
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+3000%
1−2
−3000%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12 0−1
Metro Exodus 12−14 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Valorant 95−100
+2275%
4−5
−2275%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8 0−1
Dota 2 60−65
+2900%
2−3
−2900%
Far Cry 5 18−20 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18 0−1
Fortnite 16−18 0−1

This is how M5000M and NVS 315 compete in popular games:

  • M5000M is 2000% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.67 0.77
Recency 18 August 2015 10 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 19 Watt

M5000M has a 1935.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 315, on the other hand, has 426.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M5000M is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 315 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M5000M is a mobile workstation card while NVS 315 is a workstation 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 Quadro M5000M
Quadro M5000M
NVIDIA NVS 315
NVS 315

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.


3.8
140 votes

Rate Quadro M5000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4
183 votes

Rate NVS 315 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M5000M or NVS 315, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.