Radeon RX 6600 XT vs NVS 310

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
NVS 300 NVS 310 NVS 315 NVS 510 NVS 810
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Radeon RX 6400 Radeon RX 6500 XT Radeon RX 6600 Radeon RX 6600 LE Radeon RX 6600 XT Radeon RX 6650 XT Radeon RX 6700 XT Radeon RX 6750 XT Radeon RX 6800 Radeon RX 6800 XT Radeon RX 6900 XT Radeon RX 6950 XT

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 310 with Radeon RX 6600 XT, including specs and performance data.

NVS 310
2012
512 MB DDR3, 20 Watt
0.65

RX 6600 XT outperforms NVS 310 by a whopping 6483% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

NVS 310 NVS 310
RX 6600 XT RX 6600 XT

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking118690
Place by popularitynot in top-10087
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.0163.42
Power efficiency2.2618.59
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGF119Navi 23
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date26 June 2012 (12 years ago)30 July 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$159 $379

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6600 XT has 634100% 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 cores482048
Core clock speed523 MHz1968 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2589 MHz
Number of transistors292 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate4.184331.4
Floating-point processing power0.1004 TFLOPS10.6 TFLOPS
ROPs464
TMUs8128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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 4.0 x8
Length156 mm190 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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed875 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth14 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 Connectors2x DisplayPort1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA2.1-

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 0.65
RX 6600 XT 42.79
+6483%

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 310 251
RX 6600 XT 16510
+6478%

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 HD2−3
−6650%
135
+6650%
1440p1−2
−7600%
77
+7600%
4K0−143

Cost per frame, $

1080p79.502.81
1440p159.004.92
4Kno data8.81

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 79
+0%
79
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 129
+0%
129
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
+0%
78
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Hitman 3 108
+0%
108
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 106
+0%
106
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 76
+0%
76
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Hitman 3 108
+0%
108
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 209
+0%
209
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 75
+0%
75
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 69
+0%
69
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Hitman 3 100
+0%
100
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 157
+0%
157
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 183
+0%
183
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 99
+0%
99
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 61
+0%
61
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 56
+0%
56
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
+0%
40
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Hitman 3 67
+0%
67
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 116
+0%
116
+0%
Metro Exodus 98
+0%
98
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 118
+0%
118
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hitman 3 33
+0%
33
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 54
+0%
54
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 28
+0%
28
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+0%
14
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 61
+0%
61
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 24
+0%
24
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

This is how NVS 310 and RX 6600 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6600 XT is 6650% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6600 XT is 7600% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.65 42.79
Recency 26 June 2012 30 July 2021
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 160 Watt

NVS 310 has 700% lower power consumption.

RX 6600 XT, on the other hand, has a 6483.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6600 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 310 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 310 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6600 XT is a desktop 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 310
NVS 310
AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT
Radeon RX 6600 XT
Like
Like

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

NVS 310 NVS 310
vs
FX 5500 Quadro FX 5500
RX 6600 XT Radeon RX 6600 XT
vs
RX 7600 Radeon RX 7600
NVS 310 NVS 310
vs
FX 3500 Quadro FX 3500
HD 6430M Radeon HD 6430M
vs
Arc Graphics 128EU Mobile Arc Graphics 128EU Mobile
NVS 5400M NVS 5400M
vs
RTX 3080 12 GB GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB
GeForce4 448 Go GeForce4 448 Go
vs
RTX A4500 Mobile RTX A4500 Mobile
RTX 3050 Max-Q GeForce RTX 3050 Max-Q
vs
EXK107 EXK107
RX Vega XL Radeon RX Vega XL
vs
Qualcomm Adreno 680 Adreno 680
GTX 950 GeForce GTX 950
vs
RTX 4060 Ti Mobile GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Mobile
HD 8330 Mobile IGP Radeon HD 8330 Mobile IGP
vs
Radeon 610M Radeon 610M
9800M GT GeForce 9800M GT
vs
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU)
Quadro P2000 Quadro P2000
vs
Jetson TX2 GPU Jetson TX2 GPU
GTX 1050 Mobile GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile
vs
GM204 GM204

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.3 81 vote

Rate NVS 310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 4229 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6600 XT 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.