NVS 510 vs GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB

Place in the ranking	208	924
Place by popularity	10	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	17.25	0.11
Power efficiency	15.29	3.52
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	GP106	GK107
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	19 July 2016 (8 years ago)	23 October 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$299	$449

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1060 6 GB has 15582% better value for money than NVS 510.

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 cores	1280	192
Core clock speed	1506 MHz	797 MHz
Boost clock speed	1709 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	4,400 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	35 Watt
Texture fill rate	136.7	12.75
Floating-point processing power	4.375 TFLOPS	0.306 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	16
TMUs	80	16

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	250 mm	160 mm
Width	2-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	None

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 type	GDDR5	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2002 MHz	891 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.2 GB/s	28.51 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	4x mini-DisplayPort
HDMI	+	-
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.1.126
CUDA	6.1	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.

GTX 1060 6 GB 26.66
+1389%

NVS 510 1.79

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.

GTX 1060 6 GB 10252
+1386%

NVS 510 690

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 HD	90 +1400%	6−7 −1400%
1440p	47 +1467%	3−4 −1467%
4K	32 +1500%	2−3 −1500%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.32 +2153%	74.83 −2153%
1440p	6.36 +2253%	149.67 −2253%
4K	9.34 +2303%	224.50 −2303%

GTX 1060 6 GB has 2153% lower cost per frame in 1080p
GTX 1060 6 GB has 2253% lower cost per frame in 1440p
GTX 1060 6 GB has 2303% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	50−55 +1567%	3−4 −1567%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +1700%	3−4 −1700%
Elden Ring	85−90 +1660%	5−6 −1660%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	75 +1400%	5−6 −1400%
Counter-Strike 2	50−55 +1567%	3−4 −1567%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +1700%	3−4 −1700%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +1586%	7−8 −1586%
Metro Exodus	81 +1520%	5−6 −1520%
Red Dead Redemption 2	100 +1567%	6−7 −1567%
Valorant	100−110 +1429%	7−8 −1429%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	80 +1500%	5−6 −1500%
Counter-Strike 2	50−55 +1567%	3−4 −1567%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +1700%	3−4 −1700%
Dota 2	90−95 +1417%	6−7 −1417%
Elden Ring	85−90 +1660%	5−6 −1660%
Far Cry 5	80−85 +1500%	5−6 −1500%
Fortnite	104 +1633%	6−7 −1633%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +1586%	7−8 −1586%
Grand Theft Auto V	90−95 +1400%	6−7 −1400%
Metro Exodus	54 +1700%	3−4 −1700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	217 +1450%	14−16 −1450%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30 +1400%	2−3 −1400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	82 +1540%	5−6 −1540%
Valorant	100−110 +1429%	7−8 −1429%
World of Tanks	260−270 +1550%	16−18 −1550%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	66 +1550%	4−5 −1550%
Counter-Strike 2	50−55 +1567%	3−4 −1567%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +1700%	3−4 −1700%
Dota 2	90−95 +1417%	6−7 −1417%
Far Cry 5	80−85 +1500%	5−6 −1500%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +1586%	7−8 −1586%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65 +1525%	4−5 −1525%
Valorant	100−110 +1429%	7−8 −1429%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	45−50 +1400%	3−4 −1400%
Elden Ring	45−50 +1500%	3−4 −1500%
Grand Theft Auto V	45−50 +1433%	3−4 −1433%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +1650%	10−11 −1650%
Red Dead Redemption 2	19 +1800%	1−2 −1800%
World of Tanks	170−180 +1650%	10−11 −1650%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	46 +1433%	3−4 −1433%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +2200%	1−2 −2200%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +2200%	1−2 −2200%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +1480%	5−6 −1480%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +1700%	4−5 −1700%
Metro Exodus	50 +1567%	3−4 −1567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +1900%	2−3 −1900%
Valorant	70−75 +1725%	4−5 −1725%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +2400%	1−2 −2400%
Dota 2	45−50 +1467%	3−4 −1467%
Elden Ring	21−24 +2100%	1−2 −2100%
Grand Theft Auto V	45−50 +1467%	3−4 −1467%
Metro Exodus	16 +1500%	1−2 −1500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	67 +1575%	4−5 −1575%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +1467%	3−4 −1467%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24 +2300%	1−2 −2300%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +2400%	1−2 −2400%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10	0−1
Dota 2	45−50 +1467%	3−4 −1467%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +1700%	2−3 −1700%
Fortnite	30 +1400%	2−3 −1400%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +1950%	2−3 −1950%
Valorant	35−40 +1700%	2−3 −1700%

This is how GTX 1060 6 GB and NVS 510 compete in popular games:

GTX 1060 6 GB is 1400% faster in 1080p
GTX 1060 6 GB is 1467% faster in 1440p
GTX 1060 6 GB is 1500% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	26.66	1.79
Recency	19 July 2016	23 October 2012
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	35 Watt

GTX 1060 6 GB has a 1389.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 510, on the other hand, has 242.9% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 510 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB is a desktop 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.