Quadro FX 880M vs NVS 300

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 300 with Quadro FX 880M, including specs and performance data.

NVS 300
2011
512 MB DDR3, 18 Watt
0.31

FX 880M outperforms NVS 300 by an impressive 81% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13221215
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency1.221.13
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGT218GT216
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date8 January 2011 (14 years ago)7 January 2010 (15 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 cores1648
Core clock speed520 MHz550 MHz
Number of transistors260 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate4.1608.800
Floating-point processing power0.03936 TFLOPS0.1162 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs816

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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MB1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed790 MHz790 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.64 GB/s25.28 GB/s
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-59No outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.14.1
OpenGL3.33.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.21.2

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. 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.

NVS 300 0.31
FX 880M 0.56
+80.6%

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
FX 880M 223
+82.8%

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 HD10−12
−90%
19
+90%

Cost per frame, $

1080p10.90no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
World of Tanks 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
World of Tanks 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how NVS 300 and FX 880M compete in popular games:

  • FX 880M is 90% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 32 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.31 0.56
Recency 8 January 2011 7 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 1 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 35 Watt

NVS 300 has an age advantage of 1 year, and 94.4% lower power consumption.

FX 880M, on the other hand, has a 80.6% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Quadro FX 880M is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 300 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 300 is a workstation card while Quadro FX 880M 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.


NVIDIA NVS 300
NVS 300
NVIDIA Quadro FX 880M
Quadro FX 880M

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 48 votes

Rate NVS 300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 42 votes

Rate Quadro FX 880M 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.