Quadro NVS 290 vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5430

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 5430 with Quadro NVS 290, including specs and performance data.

ATI Mobility HD 5430
2010
1 GB GDDR3, 7 Watt
0.34

NVS 290 outperforms Mobility HD 5430 by an impressive 62% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13581282
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiency3.742.02
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameParkG86
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date7 January 2010 (16 years ago)4 October 2007 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores8016
Core clock speed500 MHz459 MHz
Number of transistors292 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)7 Watt21 Watt
Texture fill rate4.0003.672
Floating-point processing power0.08 TFLOPS0.02938 TFLOPS
ROPs44
TMUs88
L1 Cache8 KBno data
L2 Cache128 KB16 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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Lengthno data168 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 typeGDDR3DDR2
Maximum RAM amount1 GB256 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/s6.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DMS-59

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.04.0
OpenGL4.43.3
OpenCL1.21.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA-1.1

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Valorant 24−27
−53.8%
40−45
+53.8%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
−50%
21−24
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−11
−60%
16−18
+60%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Valorant 24−27
−53.8%
40−45
+53.8%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−11
−60%
16−18
+60%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Valorant 24−27
−53.8%
40−45
+53.8%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−50%
21−24
+50%
Valorant 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.34 0.55
Recency 7 January 2010 4 October 2007
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 21 Watt

ATI Mobility HD 5430 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

NVS 290, on the other hand, has a 62% higher aggregate performance score.

The Quadro NVS 290 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 5430 in performance tests.

Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 5430 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro NVS 290 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.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.2 14 votes

Rate Mobility Radeon HD 5430 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 23 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 290 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Mobility Radeon HD 5430 or Quadro NVS 290, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.