Quadro P620 vs NVS 315

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 315 and Quadro P620, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

NVS 315
2013
1 GB DDR3, 19 Watt
0.89

P620 outperforms NVS 315 by a whopping 964% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1135474
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.07no data
Power efficiency3.2316.34
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGF119GP107
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date10 March 2013 (11 years ago)1 February 2018 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$159 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 cores48512
Core clock speed523 MHz1177 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1443 MHz
Number of transistors292 million3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)19 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate4.18446.18
Floating-point processing power0.1004 TFLOPS1.478 TFLOPS
ROPs416
TMUs832

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 mm145 mm
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 amount1 GB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed875 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth14 GB/s96.13 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.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.16.1

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.

NVS 315 0.89
Quadro P620 9.47
+964%

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 315 346
Quadro P620 3660
+958%

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 315 882
Quadro P620 12084
+1270%

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 HD4−5
−1075%
47
+1075%

Cost per frame, $

1080p39.75no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Fortnite 113
+0%
113
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Dota 2 90
+0%
90
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Fortnite 42
+0%
42
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 17
+0%
17
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 32
+0%
32
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Dota 2 83
+0%
83
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
+0%
17
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 29
+0%
29
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how NVS 315 and Quadro P620 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P620 is 1075% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.89 9.47
Recency 10 March 2013 1 February 2018
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 19 Watt 40 Watt

NVS 315 has 110.5% lower power consumption.

Quadro P620, on the other hand, has a 964% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P620 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 315 in performance tests.

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 315
NVS 315
NVIDIA Quadro P620
Quadro P620

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.


3.4 181 vote

Rate NVS 315 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 641 vote

Rate Quadro P620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about NVS 315 or Quadro P620, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.