RTX A500 Mobile vs Quadro NVS 130M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 130M and RTX A500 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

NVS 130M
2007
256 MB DDR2, 10 Watt
0.25

RTX A500 Mobile outperforms NVS 130M by a whopping 6876% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1371326
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.7119.93
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameG86GA107S
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date9 May 2007 (17 years ago)22 March 2022 (2 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 cores82048
Core clock speed400 MHz832 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1537 MHz
Number of transistors210 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology80 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt60 Watt (20 - 60 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate1.60098.37
Floating-point processing power0.0128 TFLOPS6.296 TFLOPS
ROPs448
TMUs464
Tensor Coresno data64
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16

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 typeDDR2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth11.2 GB/s96 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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.6
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.18.6
DLSS-+

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 130M 0.25
RTX A500 Mobile 17.44
+6876%

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 130M 97
RTX A500 Mobile 6703
+6810%

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 HD0−146
1440p-0−123
4K-0−14

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
−4100%
40−45
+4100%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−500%
42
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3300%
30−35
+3300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
−4100%
40−45
+4100%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−357%
32
+357%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3300%
30−35
+3300%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2167%
65−70
+2167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−771%
60−65
+771%
Valorant 24−27
−396%
120−130
+396%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
−4100%
40−45
+4100%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−243%
24
+243%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
−1658%
210−220
+1658%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3300%
30−35
+3300%
Dota 2 9−10
−1000%
95−100
+1000%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2167%
65−70
+2167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−771%
60−65
+771%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1275%
55
+1275%
Valorant 24−27
−396%
120−130
+396%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−186%
20
+186%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3300%
30−35
+3300%
Dota 2 9−10
−1000%
95−100
+1000%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2167%
65−70
+2167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−771%
60−65
+771%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−625%
29
+625%
Valorant 24−27
−396%
120−130
+396%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−15800%
150−160
+15800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 14−16
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−2500%
24−27
+2500%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−100%
30−33
+100%
Valorant 2−3
−4450%
90−95
+4450%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
−1600%
16−18
+1600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 54
+0%
54
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 48
+0%
48
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 66
+0%
66
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 44
+0%
44
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30
+0%
30
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2
+0%
2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX A500 Mobile is 15800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX A500 Mobile is ahead in 33 tests (50%)
  • there's a draw in 33 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.25 17.44
Recency 9 May 2007 22 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 80 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 60 Watt

NVS 130M has 500% lower power consumption.

RTX A500 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 6876% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 900% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A500 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 130M in performance tests.

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 NVS 130M
Quadro NVS 130M
NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile
RTX A500

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Quadro NVS 130M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 91 vote

Rate RTX A500 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro NVS 130M or RTX A500 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.