RTX A2000 Mobile vs NVS 315

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
NVS 310 NVS 315 Quadro 7000 Quadro Plex 7000 C2075 C2090 M2075 M2090 X2070 X2090
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
A4 Mobile A1000 Mobile A1000 Mobile 6 GB A2000 Max-Q A2000 Max-Q 8 GB A2000 Mobile A2000 Mobile 8 GB

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 315 with RTX A2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

NVS 315
2013, $159
1 GB DDR3, 19 Watt
0.83

RTX A2000 Mobile outperforms NVS 315 by a whopping 2628% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
NVS 315 NVS 315
RTX A2000 Mobile RTX A2000 Mobile

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1210282
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.03no data
Power efficiency3.3818.44
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameGF119GA107
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date10 March 2013 (13 years ago)12 April 2021 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$159 no data

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 cores482560
Core clock speed523 MHz1215 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1687 MHz
Number of transistors292 million8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)19 Watt95 Watt
Texture fill rate4.184135.0
Floating-point processing power0.1004 TFLOPS8.637 TFLOPS
ROPs448
TMUs880
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Coresno data20
L1 Cache64 KB2.5 MB
L2 Cache128 KB2 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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed875 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth14 GB/s192.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors1x DMS-59Portable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA2.18.6
DLSS-+

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 315 0.83
RTX A2000 Mobile 22.64
+2628%

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 315 346
Samples: 179
RTX A2000 Mobile 9434
+2627%
Samples: 2080

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 HD2−3
−3850%
79
+3850%
1440p1−2
−4100%
42
+4100%
4K1−2
−3700%
38
+3700%

Cost per frame, $

1080p79.50no data
1440p159.00no data
4K159.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 74
+0%
74
+0%
Palworld 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 62
+0%
62
+0%
Far Cry 5 96
+0%
96
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Palworld 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50
+0%
50
+0%
Dota 2 145
+0%
145
+0%
Far Cry 5 88
+0%
88
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 106
+0%
106
+0%
Metro Exodus 44
+0%
44
+0%
Palworld 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 96
+0%
96
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 41
+0%
41
+0%
Dota 2 129
+0%
129
+0%
Far Cry 5 83
+0%
83
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50
+0%
50
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Palworld 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 50
+0%
50
+0%
Metro Exodus 27
+0%
27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 25
+0%
25
+0%
Far Cry 5 53
+0%
53
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Palworld 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 44
+0%
44
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Palworld 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 33
+0%
33
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 72
+0%
72
+0%
Far Cry 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Palworld 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how NVS 315 and RTX A2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX A2000 Mobile is 3850% faster in 1080p
  • RTX A2000 Mobile is 4100% faster in 1440p
  • RTX A2000 Mobile is 3700% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 65 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.83 22.64
Recency 10 March 2013 12 April 2021
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 19 Watt 95 Watt

NVS 315 has 400% lower power consumption.

RTX A2000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 2628% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 400% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 315 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 315 is a workstation graphics card while RTX A2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

NVS 315 NVS 315
vs
FX 3700 Quadro FX 3700
RTX A2000 Mobile RTX A2000 Mobile
vs
RTX A1000 Mobile RTX A1000 Mobile
NVS 315 NVS 315
vs
FX 4600 Quadro FX 4600
Quadro K620 Quadro K620
vs
MX450 12W MX450 12W
GRID K120Q GRID K120Q
vs
RTX 5080 5080
Tesla K40s Tesla K40s
vs
RX 7600M XT 7600M XT
GRID K1 GRID K1
vs
RX Vega 64 Limited Edition Vega 64 Limited Edition
NVS 315 NVS 315
vs
HD 8570 OEM 8570 OEM
Tesla K20c Tesla K20c
vs
RTX 5080 5080
Quadro K5000 Quadro K5000
vs
RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB 5060 Ti 16 GB
K5000 Mac Edition Quadro K5000 Mac Edition
vs
RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell Mobile 5000 Blackwell Mobile
Quadro 7000 Quadro 7000
vs
RTX 2070 Super 2070 Super
Quadro 7000 Quadro 7000
vs
RTX 2050 Mobile 2050 Mobile

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.4 189 votes

Rate NVS 315 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 144 votes

Rate RTX A2000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about NVS 315 or RTX A2000 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.