Radeon RX 590 vs NVS 300

Place in the ranking	1324	237
Place by popularity	not in top-100	100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.01	24.01
Power efficiency	1.21	9.57
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	GT218	Polaris 30
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	8 January 2011 (14 years ago)	15 November 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$109	$279

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

RX 590 has 240000% better value for money than NVS 300.

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	2304
Core clock speed	520 MHz	1469 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1545 MHz
Number of transistors	260 million	5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	18 Watt	175 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.160	222.5
Floating-point processing power	0.03936 TFLOPS	7.119 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	32
TMUs	8	144

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	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	145 mm	241 mm
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 8-pin

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	DDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	8 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	790 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	12.64 GB/s	256.0 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 Connectors	1x DMS-59	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	4.1	6.4
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	1.2	-

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

RX 590 23.84
+7590%

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

RX 590 9382
+7590%

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 HD	1−2 −10400%	105 +10400%
1440p	0−1	64
4K	0−1	39

Cost per frame, $

1080p	109.00 −4002%	2.66 +4002%
1440p	no data	4.36
4K	no data	7.15

RX 590 has 4002% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Battlefield 5	133 +0%	133 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Far Cry 5	85 +0%	85 +0%
Fortnite	139 +0%	139 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	120 +0%	120 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120 +0%	120 +0%
Valorant	301 +0%	301 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Battlefield 5	111 +0%	111 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	250−260 +0%	250−260 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Dota 2	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Far Cry 5	79 +0%	79 +0%
Fortnite	138 +0%	138 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	113 +0%	113 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	79 +0%	79 +0%
Metro Exodus	52 +0%	52 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	108 +0%	108 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	88 +0%	88 +0%
Valorant	287 +0%	287 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	100 +0%	100 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Dota 2	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Far Cry 5	74 +0%	74 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	91 +0%	91 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	83 +0%	83 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	51 +0%	51 +0%
Valorant	110 +0%	110 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Metro Exodus	31 +0%	31 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Valorant	232 +0%	232 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite

50−55

+0%

50−55

+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	41 +0%	41 +0%
Metro Exodus	19 +0%	19 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	32 +0%	32 +0%
Valorant	113 +0%	113 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	40 +0%	40 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Far Cry 5	24 +0%	24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	46 +0%	46 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35 +0%	35 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite

+0%

This is how NVS 300 and RX 590 compete in popular games:

RX 590 is 10400% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.31	23.84
Recency	8 January 2011	15 November 2018
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	8 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	18 Watt	175 Watt

NVS 300 has 872.2% lower power consumption.

RX 590, on the other hand, has a 7590.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 590 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 300 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 300 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 590 is a desktop one.