GeForce RTX 5070 vs Quadro NVS 440

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 440 with GeForce RTX 5070, including specs and performance data.

NVS 440
2006
128 MB GDDR3, 31 Watt
0.08

RTX 5070 outperforms NVS 440 by a whopping 78663% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking146922
Place by popularitynot in top-10064
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data70.51
Power efficiency0.2019.99
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Blackwell 2.0 (2025)
GPU code nameNV43 A4GB205
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date14 February 2006 (19 years ago)4 March 2025 (recently)
Launch price (MSRP)$96.99 $549

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 coresno data6144
Core clock speed250 MHz2325 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2512 MHz
Number of transistors146 million31,100 million
Manufacturing process technology110 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)31 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate2.000 ×2482.3
Floating-point processing powerno data30.87 TFLOPS
ROPs8 ×280
TMUs8 ×2192
Tensor Coresno data192
Ray Tracing Coresno data48

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 1.0 x16PCIe 5.0 x16
Length187 mm245 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 16-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 typeGDDR3GDDR7
Maximum RAM amount128 MB ×212 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit ×2192 Bit
Memory clock speed250 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth8 GB/s ×2672.0 GB/s
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors2x DMS-591x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model3.06.8
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.4
CUDA-10.1
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 440 0.08
RTX 5070 63.01
+78663%

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 440 37
RTX 5070 28155
+75995%

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-0−1130
1440p-0−194
4K-0−166

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.22
1440pno data5.84
4Kno data8.32

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Battlefield 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Far Cry 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Battlefield 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Far Cry 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Far Cry 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 211
+0%
211
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550
+0%
500−550
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Metro Exodus 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 450−500
+0%
450−500
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 163
+0%
163
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 146
+0%
146
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.08 63.01
Recency 14 February 2006 4 March 2025
Maximum RAM amount 128 MB 12 GB
Chip lithography 110 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 31 Watt 250 Watt

NVS 440 has 706.5% lower power consumption.

RTX 5070, on the other hand, has a 78662.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 19 years, a 9500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 2100% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 5070 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 440 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 440 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce RTX 5070 is a desktop 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 NVS 440
Quadro NVS 440
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070
GeForce RTX 5070

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.


3.7 3 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 440 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 1727 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 5070 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro NVS 440 or GeForce RTX 5070, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.