GeForce GT 520 vs Cedar
Aggregated performance score
GeForce GT 520 outperforms Cedar by 3% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 1108 | 1101 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Value for money | no data | 0.01 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Cedar | GF119 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | no data | 13 April 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $59 |
| Current price | $14.38 | $88 (1.5x MSRP) |
Value for money
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Technical specs
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 80 | 48 |
| CUDA cores | no data | 48 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 810 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 292 million | 292 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 29 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 102 °C |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 6.5 billion/sec |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 155.52 gflops |
Size and 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).
| Bus support | no data | 16x PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 5.7" (14.5 cm) |
| Height | no data | 2.7" (6.9 cm) |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
Memory
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 | 1 GB (DDR3) |
| Memory bus width | no data | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 900 MHz (DDR3) |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 14.4 GB/s |
Video outputs and ports
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | Dual Link DVI-IHDMIVGA (optional) |
| Multi monitor support | no data | + |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | Internal |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.2 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | no data | + |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
