Quadro RTX 6000 vs NVS 315

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 315 and Quadro RTX 6000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

NVS 315
2013
1 GB DDR3, 19 Watt
0.90

RTX 6000 outperforms NVS 315 by a whopping 5286% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking112669
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.075.32
Power efficiency3.2512.77
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGF119TU102
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date10 March 2013 (11 years ago)13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$159 $6,299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 6000 has 7500% better value for money than NVS 315.

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 cores484608
Core clock speed523 MHz1440 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1770 MHz
Number of transistors292 million18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)19 Watt260 Watt
Texture fill rate4.184509.8
Floating-point processing power0.1004 TFLOPS16.31 TFLOPS
ROPs496
TMUs8288
Tensor Coresno data576
Ray Tracing Coresno data72

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 mm267 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin + 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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB24 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed875 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth14 GB/s672.0 GB/s

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-594x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.17.5

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 315 0.90
RTX 6000 48.47
+5286%

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
RTX 6000 18674
+5297%

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
RTX 6000 148896
+16782%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.90 48.47
Recency 10 March 2013 13 August 2018
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 24 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 19 Watt 260 Watt

NVS 315 has 1268.4% lower power consumption.

RTX 6000, on the other hand, has a 5285.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 315 in performance tests.


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 315
NVS 315
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000
Quadro RTX 6000

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.4 179 votes

Rate NVS 315 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 130 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 6000 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.