Quadro NVS 210S vs FirePro W4300

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking524not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.42no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameBonaireC51
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date1 December 2015 (8 years ago)22 December 2003 (20 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores768no data
Core clock speed930 MHz425 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million75 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt11 Watt
Texture fill rate44.640.85
Floating-point processing power1.428 TFLOPSno data
ROPs161
TMUs482

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCI
Length171 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1500 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth96 GB/sno data

Connectivity and outputs

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 Connectors4x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model6.33.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

FirePro W4300 2894
+12483%
NVS 210S 23

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 December 2015 22 December 2003
Chip lithography 28 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 11 Watt

FirePro W4300 has an age advantage of 11 years, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 210S, on the other hand, has 354.5% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FirePro W4300 and Quadro NVS 210S. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD FirePro W4300
FirePro W4300
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 210S
Quadro NVS 210S

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.1 21 vote

Rate FirePro W4300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 12 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 210S on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.