UHD Graphics 770 vs Quadro NVS 150M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 150M with UHD Graphics 770, including specs and performance data.

NVS 150M
2008
256 MB GDDR3, 10 Watt
0.17

Graphics 770 outperforms 150M by a whopping 3253% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1491658
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.3229.40
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Generation 12.2 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameG98Raptor Lake GT1
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date15 August 2008 (17 years ago)27 September 2022 (3 years ago)

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 cores8256
Core clock speed530 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1650 MHz
Number of transistors210 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate2.12026.40
Floating-point processing power0.0208 TFLOPS0.8448 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs416
L2 Cache16 KBno data

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).

InterfaceMXM-IRing Bus
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount256 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed700 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth11.2 GB/sno data
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 outputsMotherboard Dependent

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.6
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.1-

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 150M 0.17
UHD Graphics 770 5.70
+3253%

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 150M 70
Samples: 32
UHD Graphics 770 1258
+1697%
Samples: 14

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 HD0−118
4K-0−113

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 11
Palworld 3−4
−267%
11
+267%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 10
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−767%
24−27
+767%
Palworld 3−4
−200%
9
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−214%
21−24
+214%
Valorant 24−27
−175%
65−70
+175%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−12
−773%
95−100
+773%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 12−14
Dota 2 8−9
−438%
43
+438%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−767%
24−27
+767%
Palworld 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−214%
21−24
+214%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−260%
18
+260%
Valorant 24−27
−175%
65−70
+175%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 12−14
Dota 2 8−9
−400%
40
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−767%
24−27
+767%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−214%
21−24
+214%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−80%
9
+80%
Valorant 24−27
−175%
65−70
+175%

Full HD
Epic

Palworld 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−1800%
35−40
+1800%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 0−1 12−14
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%

1440p
Epic

Palworld 0−1 8−9

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Valorant 4−5
−525%
24−27
+525%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 52
+0%
52
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 12
+0%
12
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 34
+0%
34
+0%
Far Cry 5 17
+0%
17
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9
+0%
9
+0%
Far Cry 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
+0%
9
+0%
Metro Exodus 5
+0%
5
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 14
+0%
14
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
High

Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
Palworld 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14
+0%
14
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Epic

Palworld 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics 770 is 1800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 770 performs better in 25 tests (45%)
  • there's a draw in 31 tests (55%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.17 5.70
Recency 15 August 2008 27 September 2022
Chip lithography 65 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 15 Watt

NVS 150M has 50% lower power consumption.

UHD Graphics 770, on the other hand, has a 3253% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, and a 550% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics 770 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 150M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 150M is a mobile workstation graphics card while UHD Graphics 770 is a desktop 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.


4.3 4 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 150M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 1498 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 770 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro NVS 150M or UHD Graphics 770, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.