Quadro NVS 450 vs HD Graphics 2500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 2500 with Quadro NVS 450, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 2500
2012
0.65
+306%

HD Graphics 2500 outperforms NVS 450 by a whopping 306% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12601497
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data0.35
ArchitectureGeneration 7.0 (2012−2013)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameIvy Bridge GT1G98
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date1 April 2012 (14 years ago)11 November 2008 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$163.14

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores488 ×2
Core clock speed650 MHz480 MHz
Boost clock speed1150 MHzno data
Number of transistors392 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology22 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown35 Watt
Texture fill rate6.9001.920 ×2
Floating-point processing power0.1104 TFLOPS0.0192 TFLOPS ×2
ROPs14 ×2
TMUs64 ×2
L2 Cacheno data16 KB

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 1.0 x16
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 SharedGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared256 MB ×2
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit ×2
Memory clock speedSystem Shared700 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data11.2 GB/s ×2
Shared memory+-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs4x DisplayPort

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.04.0
OpenGL4.03.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.80N/A
CUDA-1.1

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 HD8
+700%
1−2
−700%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data163.14

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Palworld 3−4 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Palworld 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Valorant 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12
+500%
2−3
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
Palworld 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Valorant 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Valorant 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%

Full HD
Epic

Palworld 3−4 0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2 0−1
Palworld 1−2 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Valorant 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3 0−1

This is how HD Graphics 2500 and NVS 450 compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 2500 is 700% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.65 0.16
Recency 1 April 2012 11 November 2008
Chip lithography 22 nm 55 nm

HD Graphics 2500 has a 306% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.

The HD Graphics 2500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 450 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 2500 is a desktop graphics card while Quadro NVS 450 is a workstation one.

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.


3.1 1643 votes

Rate HD Graphics 2500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 17 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about HD Graphics 2500 or Quadro NVS 450, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.