GeForce GTX 470M vs Quadro M520

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M520 with GeForce GTX 470M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M520
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 25 Watt
4.87

GTX 470M outperforms M520 by a minimal 3% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking645637
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.564.67
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGM108GF104
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date11 January 2017 (8 years ago)3 September 2010 (14 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 cores384288
Core clock speed1041 MHz535 MHz
Boost clock speed1019 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate16.6625.68
Floating-point processing power0.7995 TFLOPS0.6163 TFLOPS
ROPs824
TMUs1648

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone
SLI options-+

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB1536 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth40 GB/s60.0 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

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+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 API
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
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.

Quadro M520 4.87
GTX 470M 5.03
+3.3%

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 M520 1889
GTX 470M 1953
+3.4%

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.

Quadro M520 2658
+32.7%
GTX 470M 2003

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.

Quadro M520 11278
+15.1%
GTX 470M 9801

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:

900p30−35
−13.3%
34
+13.3%
Full HD20
−140%
48
+140%
4K13
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Valorant 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
−6.3%
16−18
+6.3%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−4.2%
24−27
+4.2%
Fortnite 27−30
−3.4%
30−33
+3.4%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−6.3%
16−18
+6.3%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−2.4%
40−45
+2.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Valorant 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
World of Tanks 80−85
−3.8%
80−85
+3.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
−6.3%
16−18
+6.3%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−4.2%
24−27
+4.2%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−2.4%
40−45
+2.4%
Valorant 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
World of Tanks 35−40
−2.9%
35−40
+2.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how Quadro M520 and GTX 470M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 470M is 13% faster in 900p
  • GTX 470M is 140% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M520 is 8% faster in 4K

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

  • in Dota 2, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 470M is 25% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 470M is ahead in 24 tests (39%)
  • there's a draw in 37 tests (61%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.87 5.03
Recency 11 January 2017 3 September 2010
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1536 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 75 Watt

Quadro M520 has an age advantage of 6 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

GTX 470M, on the other hand, has a 3.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro M520 and GeForce GTX 470M.

Be aware that Quadro M520 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 470M is a mobile workstation one.


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 M520
Quadro M520
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470M
GeForce GTX 470M

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.


3.6 31 vote

Rate Quadro M520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 1 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 470M 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.