HD Graphics 510 vs NVS 300

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 300 with HD Graphics 510, including specs and performance data.

NVS 300
2011
512 MB DDR3, 18 Watt
0.31

HD Graphics 510 outperforms NVS 300 by a whopping 406% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1325966
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency1.237.45
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)
GPU code nameGT218Skylake GT1
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date8 January 2011 (14 years ago)1 September 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109 no data

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 cores1696
Core clock speed520 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data900 MHz
Number of transistors260 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm+
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate4.16010.80
Floating-point processing power0.03936 TFLOPS0.1728 TFLOPS
ROPs43
TMUs812

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 x16Ring Bus
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDR3LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amount512 MB32 GB
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed790 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth12.64 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors1x DMS-59Portable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.2-

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.

NVS 300 0.31
HD Graphics 510 1.57
+406%

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 300 122
HD Graphics 510 622
+410%

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 Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
World of Tanks 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
World of Tanks 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 46 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.31 1.57
Recency 8 January 2011 1 September 2015
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 32 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 15 Watt

HD Graphics 510 has a 406.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 20% lower power consumption.

The HD Graphics 510 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 300 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 300 is a workstation card while HD Graphics 510 is a notebook one.

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.


NVIDIA NVS 300
NVS 300
Intel HD Graphics 510
HD Graphics 510

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 49 votes

Rate NVS 300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 384 votes

Rate HD Graphics 510 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about NVS 300 or HD Graphics 510, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.