Quadro NVS 510M vs HD Graphics 530

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

HD Graphics 530
2015
65536 Mb DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4
2.59
+298%

HD Graphics 530 outperforms Quadro NVS 510M by 298% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking7821144
Place by popularity77not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.160.01
ArchitectureGen. 9 Skylake (2015−2016)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameSkylake GT2G71
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date5 August 2015 (8 years ago)21 August 2006 (17 years ago)
Current price$526 $105

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

HD Graphics 530 has 1500% better value for money than NVS 510M.

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 cores24no data
Core clock speed350 MHz450 MHz
Boost clock speed1150 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million278 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate27.6010.80
Floating-point performance403.2 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on HD Graphics 530 and Quadro NVS 510M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x1PCIe 1.0 x16

Memory typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount64 GB256 MB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1200 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data19.2 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model6.43.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL2.1N/A
Vulkan+N/A

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.

HD Graphics 530 2.59
+298%
NVS 510M 0.65

HD Graphics 530 outperforms Quadro NVS 510M by 298% based on our aggregated 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%

HD Graphics 530 1001
+296%
NVS 510M 253

HD Graphics 530 outperforms Quadro NVS 510M by 296% in Passmark.

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 HD14
+367%
3−4
−367%
4K7
+600%
1−2
−600%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 0−1
Battlefield 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 6
+500%
1−2
−500%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Hitman 3 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 0−1
Battlefield 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Hitman 3 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
+400%
1−2
−400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 0−1
Battlefield 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Hitman 3 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 0−1

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Hitman 3 3−4 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

This is how HD Graphics 530 and NVS 510M compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 530 is 367% faster than NVS 510M in 1080p
  • HD Graphics 530 is 600% faster than NVS 510M in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.59 0.65
Recency 5 August 2015 21 August 2006
Maximum RAM amount 64 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 35 Watt

The HD Graphics 530 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 510M in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 530 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro NVS 510M is a mobile 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 Quadro NVS 510M
Quadro NVS 510M

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.


3.1 1231 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 510M 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.