Quadro NVS 160M vs Radeon RX 580

Place in the ranking	241	1287
Place by popularity	1	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	18.94	no data
Power efficiency	8.65	2.03
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	Polaris 20	G98
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	18 April 2017 (7 years ago)	15 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$229	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 cores	2304	8
Core clock speed	1257 MHz	580 MHz
Boost clock speed	1340 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	5,700 million	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	185 Watt	12 Watt
Texture fill rate	193.0	4.640
Floating-point processing power	6.175 TFLOPS	0.0232 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	4
TMUs	144	8

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	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-I
Length	241 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	no 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	256 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	700 MHz
Memory bandwidth	256.0 GB/s	11.2 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 Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.4	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	3.3
OpenCL	2.0	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
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.

RX 580 22.95
+6457%

NVS 160M 0.35

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.

RX 580 8855
+6459%

NVS 160M 135

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	94 +9300%	1−2 −9300%
1440p	44	0−1
4K	37	0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.44	no data
1440p	5.20	no data
4K	6.19	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

35−40
+1750%

2−3

−1750%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	58 +1833%	3−4 −1833%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40	0−1
Battlefield 5	138 +6800%	2−3 −6800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 +2250%	2−3 −2250%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +1750%	2−3 −1750%
Far Cry 5	83 +8200%	1−2 −8200%
Far Cry New Dawn	83 +8200%	1−2 −8200%
Forza Horizon 4	294 +7250%	4−5 −7250%
Hitman 3	45−50 +1050%	4−5 −1050%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +1250%	8−9 −1250%
Metro Exodus	111 +11000%	1−2 −11000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	122 +2950%	4−5 −2950%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +254%	27−30 −254%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	101 +3267%	3−4 −3267%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40	0−1
Battlefield 5	113 +11200%	1−2 −11200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 +2250%	2−3 −2250%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +1750%	2−3 −1750%
Far Cry 5	69 +6800%	1−2 −6800%
Far Cry New Dawn	64	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	270 +6650%	4−5 −6650%
Hitman 3	45−50 +1050%	4−5 −1050%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +1250%	8−9 −1250%
Metro Exodus	87 +8600%	1−2 −8600%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 +1825%	4−5 −1825%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 +456%	9−10 −456%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +254%	27−30 −254%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	34 +1033%	3−4 −1033%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 +2250%	2−3 −2250%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +1750%	2−3 −1750%
Far Cry 5	49	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	82 +8100%	1−2 −8100%
Hitman 3	45−50 +1050%	4−5 −1050%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +1250%	8−9 −1250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 +1825%	4−5 −1825%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	44 +389%	9−10 −389%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +254%	27−30 −254%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

60−65

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	24−27	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16	0−1
Far Cry 5	24−27	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +12900%	1−2 −12900%
Hitman 3	27−30 +350%	6−7 −350%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +2250%	2−3 −2250%
Metro Exodus	53	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +6500%	2−3 −6500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40
+1800%

2−3

−1800%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	37	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	22	0−1
Hitman 3	18−20	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 +11800%	1−2 −11800%
Metro Exodus	33	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Far Cry 5	16	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	41	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

20−22
+900%

2−3

−900%

This is how RX 580 and NVS 160M compete in popular games:

RX 580 is 9300% faster in 1080p

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

in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 580 is 3267% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, RX 580 surpassed NVS 160M in all 29 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	22.95	0.35
Recency	18 April 2017	15 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	256 MB
Chip lithography	14 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	185 Watt	12 Watt

RX 580 has a 6457.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 160M, on the other hand, has 1441.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 580 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 160M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 580 is a desktop 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.