NVS 510 vs GeForce 410M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 410M with NVS 510, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 410M
2011
Up to 512 MB DDR3, 12 Watt
0.67

NVS 510 outperforms 410M by a whopping 167% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1184922
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.10
Power efficiency3.853.52
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGF119GK107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date5 January 2011 (13 years ago)23 October 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$449

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores48192
Core clock speed575 MHz797 MHz
Number of transistors292 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate4.60012.75
Floating-point processing power0.1104 TFLOPS0.306 TFLOPS
Gigaflops73no data
ROPs416
TMUs816

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).

Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data160 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amountUp to 512 MB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz891 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/s28.51 GB/s
Shared memory-no 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 ConnectorsDisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI4x mini-DisplayPort
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL+4.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA+3.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce 410M 0.67
NVS 510 1.79
+167%

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.

GeForce 410M 257
NVS 510 691
+169%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GeForce 410M 1032
NVS 510 1704
+65.1%

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 HD8
−163%
21−24
+163%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data21.38

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−167%
16−18
+167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−167%
80−85
+167%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−167%
16−18
+167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−167%
80−85
+167%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Hitman 3 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−167%
16−18
+167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−167%
80−85
+167%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 6−7
−167%
16−18
+167%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

This is how GeForce 410M and NVS 510 compete in popular games:

  • NVS 510 is 163% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.67 1.79
Recency 5 January 2011 23 October 2012
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 35 Watt

GeForce 410M has 191.7% lower power consumption.

NVS 510, on the other hand, has a 167.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The NVS 510 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 410M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 410M is a notebook card while NVS 510 is a workstation one.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce 410M
GeForce 410M
NVIDIA NVS 510
NVS 510

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.


3 271 vote

Rate GeForce 410M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 60 votes

Rate NVS 510 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.