Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 vs Quadro NVS 160M

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1287not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.03no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Gen. 4 (2007−2010)
GPU code nameG98Crestline
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date15 August 2008 (16 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 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 cores88
Core clock speed580 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors210 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt13.5 Watt
Texture fill rate4.640no data
Floating-point processing power0.0232 TFLOPSno data
ROPs4no data
TMUs8no data

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).

InterfaceMXM-Ino data

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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount256 MBno data
Memory bus width64 Bitno data
Memory clock speed700 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth11.2 GB/sno data
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 data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)10
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA1.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 August 2008 9 May 2007
Chip lithography 65 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 13 Watt

NVS 160M has an age advantage of 1 year, a 38.5% more advanced lithography process, and 8.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro NVS 160M and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 160M is a mobile workstation card while Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 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 NVS 160M
Quadro NVS 160M
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100

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 23 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 160M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 158 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 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.