Radeon RX 590 vs NVS 3100M

Place in the ranking	1321	292
Place by popularity	not in top-100	92
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	13.71
Power efficiency	2.73	9.87
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	GT218	Polaris 30
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	7 January 2010 (16 years ago)	15 November 2018 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$279

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 cores	16	2304
Core clock speed	606 MHz	1469 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1545 MHz
Number of transistors	260 million	5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	14 Watt	175 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.848	222.5
Floating-point processing power	0.04698 TFLOPS	7.119 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	32
TMUs	8	144
L1 Cache	no data	576 KB
L2 Cache	32 KB	2 MB

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 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	241 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 8-pin

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	GDDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	8 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	790 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	12.64 GB/s	256.0 GB/s
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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync

API and SDK support

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	4.1	6.4
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	1.2	-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

NVS 3100M 0.49

RX 590 22.17
+4424%

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.

NVS 3100M 204
Samples: 1518

RX 590 9274
+4446%

Samples: 4390

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

NVS 3100M 1121

RX 590 48454
+4224%

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	2−3 −98%	102
1440p	1−2	60 +5900%
4K	0−1	38

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.74
1440p	no data	4.65
4K	no data	7.34

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077

1−2

45−50
+4800%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	45−50 +4800%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5	120 +2900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9	120 +1400%
Valorant	27−30	301 +938%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	16−18	250−260 +1371%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	45−50 +4800%
Dota 2	10−12	110−120 +982%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5	113 +2725%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9	108 +1250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7	88 +1367%
Valorant	27−30	287 +890%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	45−50 +4800%
Dota 2	10−12	110−120 +982%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5	91 +2175%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9	83 +938%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7	51 +750%
Valorant	27−30	110 +279%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2	2−3	45−50 +2300%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	2−3	160−170 +8000%
Far Cry 6	0−1	35−40
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	5−6	170−180 +3380%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4	1−2	55−60 +5700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2	35−40 +3500%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite

0−1

50−55

4K
High

Far Cry 6	5−6	12−14 +140%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16	41 +193%
Valorant	5−6	113 +2160%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

1−2

35
+3400%

4K
Epic

Fortnite

2−3

29
+1350%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2	120−130	120−130
Resident Evil 4 Remake	50−55	50−55

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5	133	133
Counter-Strike 2	120−130	120−130
Far Cry 5	85	85
Fortnite	139	139

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5	111	111
Counter-Strike 2	120−130	120−130
Far Cry 5	79	79
Far Cry 6	60−65	60−65
Fortnite	138	138
Grand Theft Auto V	79	79
Metro Exodus	52	52

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5	100	100
Far Cry 5	74	74

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite

1440p
High

Grand Theft Auto V	40−45	40−45
Metro Exodus	31	31
Valorant	232	232

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5	60−65	60−65
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24	21−24
Far Cry 5	50−55	50−55

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2	21−24	21−24
Metro Exodus	19	19
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	32	32

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5	40	40
Counter-Strike 2	21−24	21−24
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10	9−10
Dota 2	75−80	75−80
Far Cry 5	24	24
Forza Horizon 4	46	46

This is how NVS 3100M and RX 590 compete in popular games:

RX 590 is 5000% faster in 1080p
RX 590 is 5900% faster in 1440p

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

in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 590 is 8000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 590 performs better in 28 tests (47%)
there's a draw in 31 tests (53%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.49	22.17
Recency	7 January 2010	15 November 2018
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	8 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	14 Watt	175 Watt

NVS 3100M has 92% lower power consumption.

RX 590, on the other hand, has a 4424% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 70% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 590 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 3100M in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 3100M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 590 is a desktop one.