Quadro NVS 160M vs Radeon PRO WX 2100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking638not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.06no data
Power efficiency9.43no data
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameLexaG98
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date4 June 2017 (7 years ago)15 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data

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 cores5128
Core clock speed925 MHz580 MHz
Boost clock speed1219 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,200 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt12 Watt
Texture fill rate39.014.640
Floating-point processing power1.248 TFLOPS0.0232 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs328

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 3.0 x8MXM-I
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB256 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidth48 GB/s11.2 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 Connectors1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-1.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

PRO WX 2100 1841
+1264%
NVS 160M 135

Pros & cons summary


Recency 4 June 2017 15 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 12 Watt

PRO WX 2100 has an age advantage of 8 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 160M, on the other hand, has 191.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon PRO WX 2100 and Quadro NVS 160M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon PRO WX 2100 is a workstation card while Quadro NVS 160M 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.


AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100
Radeon PRO WX 2100
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M
Quadro NVS 160M

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.


3.5 37 votes

Rate Radeon PRO WX 2100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 23 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 160M 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.