GeForce GTS 160M vs GT 1030

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 1030 with GeForce GTS 160M, including specs and performance data.

GT 1030
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
6.37
+262%

GT 1030 outperforms GTS 160M by a whopping 262% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking574923
Place by popularity36not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.31no data
Power efficiency14.802.04
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGP108G94
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date17 May 2017 (7 years ago)3 March 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$79 no data

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 cores38464
Core clock speed1228 MHz600 MHz
Boost clock speed1468 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,800 million505 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate35.2319.20
Floating-point processing power1.127 TFLOPS0.192 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data288
ROPs1616
TMUs2432

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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x4PCIe 2.0 x16
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data
SLI options-2-way
MXM Typeno dataMXM 3.0 Type-B

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHzUp to 800 MHz
Memory bandwidth48.06 GB/s51 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMIVGADisplayPortDual Link DVIHDMILVDSSingle Link DVI
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
G-SYNC support+-
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

Supported technologies

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

Power managementno data8.0
VR Ready+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA6.1+

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.

GT 1030 6.37
+262%
GTS 160M 1.76

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.

GT 1030 2456
+262%
GTS 160M 678

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 1030 20192
+409%
GTS 160M 3965

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 HD24
+300%
6−7
−300%
1440p19
+280%
5−6
−280%
4K9
+350%
2−3
−350%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.29no data
1440p4.16no data
4K8.78no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 15
+275%
4−5
−275%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18
+157%
7−8
−157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Battlefield 5 22 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18
+260%
5−6
−260%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+175%
4−5
−175%
Far Cry 5 21
+600%
3−4
−600%
Far Cry New Dawn 27
+575%
4−5
−575%
Forza Horizon 4 93
+1450%
6−7
−1450%
Hitman 3 16
+167%
6−7
−167%
Horizon Zero Dawn 152
+850%
16−18
−850%
Metro Exodus 26
+271%
7−8
−271%
Red Dead Redemption 2 31
+933%
3−4
−933%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 37
+311%
9−10
−311%
Watch Dogs: Legion 93
+174%
30−35
−174%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24
+243%
7−8
−243%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Battlefield 5 18−20 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16
+220%
5−6
−220%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
+75%
4−5
−75%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Far Cry New Dawn 20
+400%
4−5
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 84
+1300%
6−7
−1300%
Hitman 3 15
+150%
6−7
−150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 123
+669%
16−18
−669%
Metro Exodus 20
+300%
5−6
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 15
+400%
3−4
−400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 19
+111%
9−10
−111%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 84
+147%
30−35
−147%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7
+0%
7−8
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+167%
6−7
−167%
Hitman 3 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Horizon Zero Dawn 19
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+0%
12−14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6
−467%
30−35
+467%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 19
+533%
3−4
−533%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Hitman 3 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14
+180%
5−6
−180%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
+267%
3−4
−267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 48
+433%
9−10
−433%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 4
+300%
1−2
−300%
Hitman 3 3−4 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1
−100%
2−3
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 7
+600%
1−2
−600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6
+500%
1−2
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%

This is how GT 1030 and GTS 160M compete in popular games:

  • GT 1030 is 300% faster in 1080p
  • GT 1030 is 280% faster in 1440p
  • GT 1030 is 350% faster in 4K

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 1030 is 1450% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTS 160M is 467% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 1030 is ahead in 46 tests (90%)
  • GTS 160M is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (6%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.37 1.76
Recency 17 May 2017 3 March 2009
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 60 Watt

GT 1030 has a 261.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 1030 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 160M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 1030 is a desktop card while GeForce GTS 160M is a notebook 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 GT 1030
GeForce GT 1030
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 160M
GeForce GTS 160M

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.


3.3 7736 votes

Rate GeForce GT 1030 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate GeForce GTS 160M 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.