Radeon RX 6500 XT vs Quadro NVS 160M

Place in the ranking	1289	220
Place by popularity	not in top-100	82
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	58.67
Power efficiency	2.00	15.90
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	G98	Navi 24
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	15 August 2008 (16 years ago)	19 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$199

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 cores	8	1024
Core clock speed	580 MHz	2610 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2815 MHz
Number of transistors	210 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12 Watt	107 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.640	180.2
Floating-point processing power	0.0232 TFLOPS	5.765 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	32
TMUs	8	64
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	16

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).

Interface	MXM-I	PCIe 4.0 x4
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 6-pin

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 type	GDDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	8 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	700 MHz	2248 MHz
Memory bandwidth	11.2 GB/s	143.9 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.0	6.6
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	1.1	-

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. 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.

NVS 160M 0.35

RX 6500 XT 24.83
+6994%

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 160M 135

RX 6500 XT 9567
+6987%

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 HD	0−1	62
1440p	-0−1	28
4K	-0−1	16

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	3.21
1440p	no data	7.11
4K	no data	12.44

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

2−3

−3500%

72
+3500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −1700%	50−55 +1700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −2400%	50−55 +2400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −2600%	54 +2600%
Hitman 3	4−5 −1150%	50−55 +1150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −1325%	110−120 +1325%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −2000%	80−85 +2000%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −268%	100−110 +268%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −1700%	50−55 +1700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −2400%	50−55 +2400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1600%	34 +1600%
Hitman 3	4−5 −1150%	50−55 +1150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −1325%	110−120 +1325%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −2575%	107 +2575%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −489%	50−55 +489%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −268%	100−110 +268%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −1700%	50−55 +1700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −2400%	50−55 +2400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1400%	30 +1400%
Hitman 3	4−5 −1150%	50−55 +1150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −1050%	92 +1050%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −1975%	83 +1975%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −500%	54 +500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +12%	25 −12%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	17
Hitman 3	6−7 −383%	27−30 +383%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2−3 −3200%	66 +3200%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−1950%

40−45
+1950%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −1400%	14−16 +1400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	6

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−950%

21−24
+950%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	51 +0%	51 +0%
Battlefield 5	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Metro Exodus	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	43 +0%	43 +0%
Battlefield 5	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Metro Exodus	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	31 +0%	31 +0%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

60−65

+0%

60−65

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	23 +0%	23 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Metro Exodus	57 +0%	57 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	56 +0%	56 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Hitman 3	10 +0%	10 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	28 +0%	28 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4 +0%	4 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	25 +0%	25 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10 +0%	10 +0%

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the NVS 160M is 12% faster.
in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RX 6500 XT is 3500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

NVS 160M is ahead in 1 test (1%)
RX 6500 XT is ahead in 28 tests (40%)
there's a draw in 41 test (59%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.35	24.83
Recency	15 August 2008	19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	8 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12 Watt	107 Watt

NVS 160M has 791.7% lower power consumption.

RX 6500 XT, on the other hand, has a 6994.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6500 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 160M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 160M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 6500 XT is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.