Quadro NVS 160M vs GeForce 9100M G

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9100M G with Quadro NVS 160M, including specs and performance data.

9100M G
2008
0.20

160M outperforms 9100M G by an impressive 75% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking14491345
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data2.25
Architectureno dataTesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameMCP77MH MCP79MHG98
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date3 June 2008 (17 years ago)15 August 2008 (17 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 cores88
Core clock speed450 MHz580 MHz
Number of transistorsno data210 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data12 Watt
Texture fill rateno data4.640
Floating-point processing powerno data0.0232 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8
L2 Cacheno data16 KB

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).

Interfaceno dataMXM-I

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 typeno dataGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data256 MB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data700 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data11.2 GB/s
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 dataNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX1011.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data3.3
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-1.1

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.

9100M G 0.20
NVS 160M 0.35
+75%

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.

9100M G 83
Samples: 83
NVS 160M 145
+74.7%
Samples: 409

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 24−27
−4%
24−27
+4%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
−4%
24−27
+4%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
−4%
24−27
+4%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

1440p
Ultra

Escape from Tarkov 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the NVS 160M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • NVS 160M performs better in 12 tests (43%)
  • there's a draw in 16 tests (57%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.20 0.35
Recency 3 June 2008 15 August 2008

NVS 160M has a 75% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 months.

The Quadro NVS 160M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9100M G in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 9100M G is a notebook graphics card while Quadro NVS 160M is a mobile workstation one.

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 9100M G
GeForce 9100M G
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M
Quadro NVS 160M

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.


3.5 22 votes

Rate GeForce 9100M G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 23 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 160M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 9100M G or Quadro NVS 160M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.