NVS 300 vs GeForce GTX 860M

Place in the ranking	525	1329
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.01
Power efficiency	7.28	1.19
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	GM107	GT218
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	13 January 2014 (11 years ago)	8 January 2011 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$109

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 cores	1152 or 640	16
Core clock speed	797 MHz	520 MHz
Boost clock speed	1085 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,870 million	260 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	18 Watt
Texture fill rate	43.40	4.160
Floating-point processing power	1.389 TFLOPS	0.03936 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	4
TMUs	40	8

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 size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	145 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
SLI options	+	-

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	512 MB
Standard memory configuration	GDDR5	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	Up to 2500 MHz	790 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80.0 GB/s	12.64 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	No outputs	1x DMS-59
eDP 1.2 signal support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
LVDS signal support	Up to 1920x1200	no data
VGA аnalog display support	Up to 2048x1536	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP content protection	+	-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	+	-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	+	-

Supported technologies

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

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
Ansel	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	5.1	4.1
OpenGL	4.5	3.3
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/A
CUDA	+	1.2

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 860M 7.83
+2426%

NVS 300 0.31

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 860M 3048
+2440%

NVS 300 120

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:

900p	91 +2933%	3−4 −2933%
Full HD	36 +3500%	1−2 −3500%
4K	14	0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

109.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +3100%	1−2 −3100%
Forza Horizon 5	18−20	0−1
Metro Exodus	21−24	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24	0−1
Valorant	27−30 +2800%	1−2 −2800%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18	0−1
Dota 2	17	0−1
Far Cry 5	30−35 +3300%	1−2 −3300%
Fortnite	45−50 +4600%	1−2 −4600%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +3100%	1−2 −3100%
Forza Horizon 5	18−20	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	26 +2500%	1−2 −2500%
Metro Exodus	21−24	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 +3050%	2−3 −3050%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24	0−1
Valorant	27−30 +2800%	1−2 −2800%
World of Tanks	120−130 +2900%	4−5 −2900%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18	0−1
Dota 2	27−30 +2700%	1−2 −2700%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +3300%	1−2 −3300%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +3100%	1−2 −3100%
Forza Horizon 5	18−20	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 +3050%	2−3 −3050%
Valorant	27−30 +2800%	1−2 −2800%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	9−10	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	10−11	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +3900%	1−2 −3900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7	0−1
World of Tanks	55−60 +2750%	2−3 −2750%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7	0−1
Far Cry 5	16−18	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	16−18	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	12−14	0−1
Metro Exodus	12−14	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12	0−1
Valorant	20−22	0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7	0−1
Dota 2	18−20	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20	0−1
Metro Exodus	3−4	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	6−7	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Dota 2	18−20	0−1
Far Cry 5	9−10	0−1
Fortnite	8−9	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	9−10	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	5−6	0−1
Valorant	8−9	0−1

This is how GTX 860M and NVS 300 compete in popular games:

GTX 860M is 2933% faster in 900p
GTX 860M is 3500% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.83	0.31
Recency	13 January 2014	8 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	18 Watt

GTX 860M has a 2425.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 300, on the other hand, has 316.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 860M is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 300 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 860M is a notebook card while NVS 300 is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.