RTX 6000 Ada Generation vs NVS 310

Place in the ranking	1195	18
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.04	7.56
Power efficiency	2.29	16.88
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GF119	AD102
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	26 June 2012 (12 years ago)	3 December 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$159	$6,799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 18800% better value for money than NVS 310.

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	48	18176
Core clock speed	523 MHz	915 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2505 MHz
Number of transistors	292 million	76,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	300 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.184	1,423
Floating-point processing power	0.1004 TFLOPS	91.06 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	192
TMUs	8	568
Tensor Cores	no data	568
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	142

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 4.0 x16
Length	156 mm	267 mm
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 16-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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	48 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	875 MHz	2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14 GB/s	960.0 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

2x DisplayPort

4x DisplayPort 1.4a

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.8
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	2.1	8.9

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 310 0.64

RTX 6000 Ada Generation 70.86
+10972%

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 310 255

RTX 6000 Ada Generation 28213
+10964%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

NVS 310 880

RTX 6000 Ada Generation 323572
+36670%

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 −18900%	190 +18900%
1440p	1−2 −15900%	160 +15900%
4K	1−2 −11400%	115 +11400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	159.00 −344%	35.78 +344%
1440p	159.00 −274%	42.49 +274%
4K	159.00 −169%	59.12 +169%

RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 344% lower cost per frame in 1080p
RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 274% lower cost per frame in 1440p
RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 169% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2

164

+0%

164

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	163 +0%	163 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	400−450 +0%	400−450 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Metro Exodus	113 +0%	113 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Valorant	350−400 +0%	350−400 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	155 +0%	155 +0%
Dota 2	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Far Cry 5	123 +0%	123 +0%
Fortnite	290−300 +0%	290−300 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	400−450 +0%	400−450 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Metro Exodus	106 +0%	106 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Valorant	350−400 +0%	350−400 +0%
World of Tanks	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	147 +0%	147 +0%
Far Cry 5	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	400−450 +0%	400−450 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%
Valorant	350−400 +0%	350−400 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Dota 2	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
World of Tanks	500−550 +0%	500−550 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Far Cry 5	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Metro Exodus	99 +0%	99 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	219 +0%	219 +0%
Valorant	300−350 +0%	300−350 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	79 +0%	79 +0%
Dota 2	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Metro Exodus	90 +0%	90 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	30 +0%	30 +0%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Fortnite	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Valorant	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%

This is how NVS 310 and RTX 6000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 18900% faster in 1080p
RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 15900% faster in 1440p
RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 11400% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 56 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.64	70.86
Recency	26 June 2012	3 December 2022
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	48 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	300 Watt

NVS 310 has 1400% lower power consumption.

RTX 6000 Ada Generation, on the other hand, has a 10971.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 9500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 6000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 310 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.