NVS 510 vs GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition with NVS 510, including specs and performance data.
780M Mac Edition outperforms NVS 510 by a whopping 280% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 625 | 988 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.04 |
| Power efficiency | 3.89 | 3.57 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | GK104 | GK107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 8 November 2013 (12 years ago) | 23 October 2012 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $449 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 1536 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 771 MHz | 797 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 797 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 3,540 million | 1,270 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 122 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 102.0 | 12.75 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.448 TFLOPS | 0.306 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 16 |
| TMUs | 128 | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 16 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 256 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).
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 160 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 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 | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz | 891 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 28.51 GB/s |
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 Connectors | No outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | 3.0 | 3.0 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 6.15 | 1.62 |
| Recency | 8 November 2013 | 23 October 2012 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 122 Watt | 35 Watt |
GTX 780M Mac Edition has a 279.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
NVS 510, on the other hand, has 248.6% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 510 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition is a notebook graphics card while NVS 510 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
