NVS 310 vs GeForce GTX 480

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 480 with NVS 310, including specs and performance data.

GTX 480
2010
1536 MB GDDR5, 295 Watt
10.63
+1561%

GTX 480 outperforms NVS 310 by a whopping 1561% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking3981153
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.27no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGF100GF119
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date7 December 2010 (13 years ago)26 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 $159
Current price$15.99 (0x MSRP)$80 (0.5x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 480 and NVS 310 have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores48048
CUDA cores480no data
Core clock speed700 MHz523 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)295 Watt20 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate42 billion/sec4.184
Floating-point performance1,345.0 gflops100.4 gflops

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 support16x PCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm)156 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors6-pin & 8-pinNone
SLI options+no data

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB512 MB
Memory bus width384 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1848 MHz (3696 data rate)1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth177.4 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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMI2x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+no data
HDCP+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno 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
OpenGL4.24.6
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.

GTX 480 10.63
+1561%
NVS 310 0.64

GeForce GTX 480 outperforms NVS 310 by 1561% based on our aggregate 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%

GTX 480 4106
+1569%
NVS 310 246

GeForce GTX 480 outperforms NVS 310 by 1569% 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%

GTX 480 13168
+1395%
NVS 310 881

GeForce GTX 480 outperforms NVS 310 by 1395% 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.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 260−270
+1525%
16−18
−1525%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 350−400
+1491%
21−24
−1491%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 260−270
+1525%
16−18
−1525%
Battlefield 5 500−550
+1415%
30−35
−1415%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 300−310
+1329%
21−24
−1329%
Cyberpunk 2077 260−270
+1525%
16−18
−1525%
Far Cry 5 400−450
+1500%
24−27
−1500%
Far Cry New Dawn 450−500
+1400%
30−33
−1400%
Forza Horizon 4 850−900
+1535%
50−55
−1535%
Hitman 3 300−310
+1400%
20−22
−1400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 700−750
+1491%
40−45
−1491%
Metro Exodus 500−550
+1415%
30−35
−1415%
Red Dead Redemption 2 450−500
+1400%
30−33
−1400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 500−550
+1415%
30−35
−1415%
Watch Dogs: Legion 600−650
+1522%
35−40
−1522%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 350−400
+1491%
21−24
−1491%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 260−270
+1525%
16−18
−1525%
Battlefield 5 500−550
+1415%
30−35
−1415%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 300−310
+1329%
21−24
−1329%
Cyberpunk 2077 260−270
+1525%
16−18
−1525%
Far Cry 5 400−450
+1500%
24−27
−1500%
Far Cry New Dawn 450−500
+1400%
30−33
−1400%
Forza Horizon 4 850−900
+1535%
50−55
−1535%
Hitman 3 300−310
+1400%
20−22
−1400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 700−750
+1491%
40−45
−1491%
Metro Exodus 500−550
+1415%
30−35
−1415%
Red Dead Redemption 2 450−500
+1400%
30−33
−1400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 500−550
+1415%
30−35
−1415%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 350−400
+1491%
21−24
−1491%
Watch Dogs: Legion 600−650
+1522%
35−40
−1522%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 350−400
+1491%
21−24
−1491%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 260−270
+1525%
16−18
−1525%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 300−310
+1329%
21−24
−1329%
Cyberpunk 2077 260−270
+1525%
16−18
−1525%
Far Cry 5 400−450
+1500%
24−27
−1500%
Forza Horizon 4 850−900
+1535%
50−55
−1535%
Horizon Zero Dawn 700−750
+1491%
40−45
−1491%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 500−550
+1415%
30−35
−1415%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 350−400
+1491%
21−24
−1491%
Watch Dogs: Legion 600−650
+1522%
35−40
−1522%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 450−500
+1400%
30−33
−1400%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 300−310
+1329%
21−24
−1329%
Far Cry New Dawn 290−300
+1511%
18−20
−1511%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 160−170
+1500%
10−11
−1500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 110−120
+1471%
7−8
−1471%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 210−220
+1515%
12−14
−1515%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+1500%
5−6
−1500%
Far Cry 5 280−290
+1547%
16−18
−1547%
Forza Horizon 4 300−310
+1400%
20−22
−1400%
Hitman 3 230−240
+1543%
14−16
−1543%
Horizon Zero Dawn 350−400
+1491%
21−24
−1491%
Metro Exodus 260−270
+1525%
16−18
−1525%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 240−250
+1500%
14−16
−1500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 160−170
+1500%
10−11
−1500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+1483%
6−7
−1483%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 290−300
+1511%
18−20
−1511%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 160−170
+1500%
10−11
−1500%
Far Cry New Dawn 130−140
+1525%
8−9
−1525%
Hitman 3 110−120
+1471%
7−8
−1471%
Horizon Zero Dawn 180−190
+1536%
10−12
−1536%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 95−100
+1483%
6−7
−1483%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 130−140
+1525%
8−9
−1525%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 95−100
+1483%
6−7
−1483%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 80−85
+1500%
5−6
−1500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 80−85
+1500%
5−6
−1500%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+1483%
6−7
−1483%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+1515%
12−14
−1515%
Horizon Zero Dawn 180−190
+1536%
10−12
−1536%
Metro Exodus 180−190
+1536%
10−12
−1536%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+1525%
4−5
−1525%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 160−170
+1500%
10−11
−1500%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.63 0.64
Recency 7 December 2010 26 June 2012
Cost $499 $159
Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 512 MB
Power consumption (TDP) 295 Watt 20 Watt

The GeForce GTX 480 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 310 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 480 is a desktop card while NVS 310 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 GTX 480
GeForce GTX 480
NVIDIA NVS 310
NVS 310

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.


3.4 197 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 480 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 65 votes

Rate NVS 310 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.