Quadro NVS 160M vs NVS 2100M

Place in the ranking	1348	1336
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	2.27	2.22
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GT218	G98
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	7 January 2010 (15 years ago)	15 August 2008 (17 years ago)

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	16	8
Core clock speed	535 MHz	580 MHz
Number of transistors	260 million	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	11 Watt	12 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.280	4.640
Floating-point processing power	0.03936 TFLOPS	0.0232 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	4
TMUs	8	8
L2 Cache	32 KB	16 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).

Interface

PCIe 2.0 x16

MXM-I

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	GDDR3	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	256 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	790 MHz	700 MHz
Memory bandwidth	12.64 GB/s	11.2 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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 Connectors

No outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	4.1	4.0
OpenGL	3.3	3.3
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	1.2	1.1

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

NVS 2100M 0.31

NVS 160M 0.33
+6.5%

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.

NVS 2100M 139
Samples: 63

NVS 160M 145
+4.3%

Samples: 409

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%
Hogwarts Legacy	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hogwarts Legacy	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Valorant	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hogwarts Legacy	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Valorant	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hogwarts Legacy	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Valorant	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

1440p
High

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

1440p
Ultra

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

1440p
Epic

Fortnite

0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Valorant	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

1−2

+0%

1−2

+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite

2−3

+0%

2−3

+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the NVS 160M is 33% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

NVS 160M performs better in 1 test (3%)
there's a draw in 28 tests (97%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.31	0.33
Recency	7 January 2010	15 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	256 MB
Chip lithography	40 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	11 Watt	12 Watt

NVS 2100M has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 9.1% lower power consumption.

NVS 160M, on the other hand, has a 6.5% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between NVS 2100M and Quadro NVS 160M.

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.

NVS 2100M

Quadro NVS 160M

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

NVS 2100M

Mobility FireGL V5700

GeForce RTX 4070 Max-Q

Community ratings

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

4.4 10 votes

Rate NVS 2100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

3 23 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 160M on a scale of 1 to 5:

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about NVS 2100M or Quadro NVS 160M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.