Radeon RX 590 vs NVS 300

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 300 with Radeon RX 590, including specs and performance data.

NVS 300
2011
512 MB DDR3, 18 Watt
0.30

RX 590 outperforms NVS 300 by a whopping 7713% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1325237
Place by popularitynot in top-100100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.0123.85
Power efficiency1.239.62
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGT218Polaris 30
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date8 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 238400% 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 cores162304
Core clock speed520 MHz1469 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1545 MHz
Number of transistors260 million5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate4.160222.5
Floating-point processing power0.03936 TFLOPS7.119 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs8144

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 3.0 x16
Length145 mm241 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed790 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.64 GB/s256.0 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-591x 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.

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model4.16.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
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 0.30
RX 590 23.44
+7713%

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 9387
+7594%

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 HD1−2
−10100%
102
+10100%
1440p0−161
4K-0−137

Cost per frame, $

1080p109.00
−3885%
2.74
+3885%
1440pno data4.57
4Kno data7.54
  • RX 590 has 3885% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 87
+0%
87
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 137
+0%
137
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 88
+0%
88
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 91
+0%
91
+0%
Valorant 128
+0%
128
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 129
+0%
129
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 52
+0%
52
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 116
+0%
116
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 114
+0%
114
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 79
+0%
79
+0%
Metro Exodus 60
+0%
60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 239
+0%
239
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 39
+0%
39
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Valorant 64
+0%
64
+0%
World of Tanks 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 71
+0%
71
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100
+0%
100
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 79
+0%
79
+0%
Valorant 110
+0%
110
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 25
+0%
25
+0%
World of Tanks 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70
+0%
70
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 58
+0%
58
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 75
+0%
75
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 41
+0%
41
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 41
+0%
41
+0%
Metro Exodus 19
+0%
19
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 82
+0%
82
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16
+0%
16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 41
+0%
41
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 34
+0%
34
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40
+0%
40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 39
+0%
39
+0%

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

  • RX 590 is 10100% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.30 23.44
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 7713.3% 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.

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
AMD Radeon RX 590
Radeon RX 590

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
4.1 2593 votes

Rate Radeon RX 590 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 Radeon RX 590, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.