Quadro NVS 295 vs HD Graphics 5000
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics 5000 with Quadro NVS 295, including specs and performance data.
HD Graphics 5000 outperforms NVS 295 by a whopping 435% 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 | 992 | 1359 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.44 | 0.84 |
| Architecture | Generation 7.5 (2013) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | Haswell GT3 | G98 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 27 May 2013 (11 years ago) | 7 May 2009 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $54.50 |
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 | 320 | 8 |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | 540 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,300 million | 210 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 23 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 40.00 | 4.320 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.64 TFLOPS | 0.0208 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 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).
| Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 168 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 | System Shared | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 695 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 11.12 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 Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | 2x DisplayPort |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | + | N/A |
| CUDA | - | 1.1 |
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.
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.
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 | 11
+450%
| 2−3
−450%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 27.25 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+483%
|
6−7
−483%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−35
+520%
|
5−6
−520%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 18−20
+500%
|
3−4
−500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+483%
|
6−7
−483%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 18−20
+500%
|
3−4
−500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+483%
|
6−7
−483%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 4−5 | 0−1 |
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+600%
|
2−3
−600%
|
| Valorant | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+650%
|
2−3
−650%
|
| Valorant | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4 | 0−1 |
This is how HD Graphics 5000 and NVS 295 compete in popular games:
- HD Graphics 5000 is 450% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.39 | 0.26 |
| Recency | 27 May 2013 | 7 May 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 23 Watt |
HD Graphics 5000 has a 434.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 195.5% more advanced lithography process.
NVS 295, on the other hand, has 30.4% lower power consumption.
The HD Graphics 5000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 295 in performance tests.
Be aware that HD Graphics 5000 is a notebook card while Quadro NVS 295 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.
