NVS 510 vs HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) with NVS 510, including specs and performance data.
NVS 510 outperforms HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) by a whopping 179% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1285 | 1009 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.04 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 3.58 |
| Architecture | Gen. 7 Ivy Bridge (2012) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | Ivy Bridge GT1 | GK107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 1 October 2012 (13 years ago) | 23 October 2012 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $449 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 cores | 6 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | 797 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,270 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 35 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 12.75 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.306 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 16 |
| TMUs | no data | 16 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 16 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 256 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).
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 160 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | no data | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64/128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 891 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 28.51 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | no data |
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 Connectors | no data | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.0 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | - | 3.0 |
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 | 9
−167%
| 24−27
+167%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 18.71 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Palworld | 3−4
−167%
|
8−9
+167%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−150%
|
10−11
+150%
|
| Palworld | 3−4
−167%
|
8−9
+167%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−163%
|
21−24
+163%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−178%
|
75−80
+178%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 11
−173%
|
30−33
+173%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−12
−173%
|
30−33
+173%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−150%
|
10−11
+150%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Palworld | 3−4
−167%
|
8−9
+167%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−163%
|
21−24
+163%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−167%
|
16−18
+167%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−178%
|
75−80
+178%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−12
−173%
|
30−33
+173%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−150%
|
10−11
+150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−163%
|
21−24
+163%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−167%
|
16−18
+167%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−178%
|
75−80
+178%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Palworld | 3−4
−167%
|
8−9
+167%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 3−4
−167%
|
8−9
+167%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
−167%
|
16−18
+167%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Palworld | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−167%
|
40−45
+167%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−167%
|
16−18
+167%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
This is how HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) and NVS 510 compete in popular games:
- NVS 510 is 167% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.58 | 1.62 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 28 nm |
HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) has a 27% more advanced lithography process.
NVS 510, on the other hand, has a 179% higher aggregate performance score.
The NVS 510 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) in performance tests.
Be aware that HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) is a notebook graphics card while NVS 510 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.
