NVS 300 vs Radeon R5 Graphics

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated1316
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiencyno data1.18
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameSpectre SLGT218
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date17 September 2014 (10 years ago)8 January 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$109

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 cores25616
Core clock speed497 MHz520 MHz
Boost clock speed720 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,410 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate7.9524.160
Floating-point processing power0.2545 TFLOPS0.03936 TFLOPS
ROPs44
TMUs168

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
WidthIGP1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared512 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared790 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data12.64 GB/s

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 outputs1x DMS-59

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.04.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-1.2

Pros & cons summary


Recency 17 September 2014 8 January 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 18 Watt

R5 Graphics has an age advantage of 3 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 20% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R5 Graphics and NVS 300. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R5 Graphics is a desktop card while NVS 300 is a 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 R5 Graphics
Radeon R5 Graphics
NVIDIA NVS 300
NVS 300

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.


2.7 1555 votes

Rate Radeon R5 Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 46 votes

Rate NVS 300 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.