NVS 315 vs GeForce 820M

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

GeForce 820M
2014
2048 MB DDR3
1.29
+44.9%

GeForce 820M outperforms NVS 315 by 45% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking9921085
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.030.02
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameN15V-GMGF119
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date7 January 2014 (10 years ago)10 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$159
Current price$490 $213 (1.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GeForce 820M has 50% better value for money than NVS 315.

Detailed specifications

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 cores9648
Core clock speed775 MHz523 MHz
Number of transistors585 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt19 Watt
Texture fill rate10.004.184
Floating-point performance240.0 gflops100.4 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce 820M and NVS 315 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Bus supportPCI Express 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data145 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 amount2 GB1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s14 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DMS-59

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boost2.0no data
Optimus+no data
GameWorks+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+2.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 820M 1.29
+44.9%
NVS 315 0.89

GeForce 820M outperforms NVS 315 by 45% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GeForce 820M 499
+44.2%
NVS 315 346

GeForce 820M outperforms NVS 315 by 44% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GeForce 820M 2736
+210%
NVS 315 883

GeForce 820M outperforms NVS 315 by 210% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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 HD16
+60%
10−12
−60%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

This is how GeForce 820M and NVS 315 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce 820M is 60% faster than NVS 315 in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.29 0.89
Recency 7 January 2014 10 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 19 Watt

The GeForce 820M is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 315 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 820M is a notebook card while NVS 315 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 820M
GeForce 820M
NVIDIA NVS 315
NVS 315

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.


3.1 751 vote

Rate GeForce 820M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 154 votes

Rate NVS 315 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.