NVS 315 vs HD Graphics 530

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 530 with NVS 315, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 530
2015
64 GB DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4, 15 Watt
2.51
+189%

HD Graphics 530 outperforms NVS 315 by a whopping 189% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8281134
Place by popularity85not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.07
Power efficiency11.963.27
ArchitectureGeneration 9.0 (2015−2016)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameSkylake GT2GF119
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 September 2015 (9 years ago)10 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$159

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores19248
Core clock speed350 MHz523 MHz
Boost clock speed950 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm+40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt19 Watt
Texture fill rate22.804.184
Floating-point processing power0.3648 TFLOPS0.1004 TFLOPS
ROPs34
TMUs248

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).

InterfaceRing BusPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4DDR3
Maximum RAM amount64 GB1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared875 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data14 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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x DMS-59

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.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.01.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA-2.1

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. 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.

HD Graphics 530 2.51
+189%
NVS 315 0.87

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.

HD Graphics 530 1001
+189%
NVS 315 346

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 HD13
+225%
4−5
−225%
4K7
+250%
2−3
−250%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data39.75
4Kno data79.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3 0−1
Metro Exodus 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Valorant 2−3 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Dota 2 8
+300%
2−3
−300%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Fortnite 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 26
+189%
9−10
−189%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
+200%
2−3
−200%
Valorant 2−3 0−1
World of Tanks 45−50
+194%
16−18
−194%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Dota 2 20
+233%
6−7
−233%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+200%
8−9
−200%
Valorant 2−3 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
World of Tanks 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Valorant 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 7
+250%
2−3
−250%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Fortnite 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 1−2 0−1
Valorant 2−3 0−1

This is how HD Graphics 530 and NVS 315 compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 530 is 225% faster in 1080p
  • HD Graphics 530 is 250% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.51 0.87
Recency 1 September 2015 10 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount 64 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 19 Watt

HD Graphics 530 has a 188.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 26.7% lower power consumption.

The HD Graphics 530 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 315 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 530 is a notebook card while NVS 315 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.


Intel HD Graphics 530
HD Graphics 530
NVIDIA NVS 315
NVS 315

Other comparisons

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.


3.1 1595 votes

Rate HD Graphics 530 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 181 vote

Rate NVS 315 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.