Quadro RTX A6000 vs NVS 315

Place in the ranking	1126	38
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.07	10.47
Power efficiency	3.25	13.39
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GF119	GA102
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	10 March 2013 (11 years ago)	5 October 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$159	$4,649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX A6000 has 14857% 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 cores	48	10752
Core clock speed	523 MHz	1410 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1800 MHz
Number of transistors	292 million	28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	19 Watt	300 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.184	604.8
Floating-point processing power	0.1004 TFLOPS	38.71 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	112
TMUs	8	336
Tensor Cores	no data	336
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	84

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	145 mm	267 mm
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	8-pin EPS

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	1 GB	48 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	875 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14 GB/s	768.0 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

1x DMS-59

4x DisplayPort 1.4a

API 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	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	2.1	8.6

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 A6000 58.60
+6411%

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 A6000 22576
+6425%

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	2−3 −8700%	176 +8700%
1440p	2−3 −6450%	131 +6450%
4K	1−2 −12100%	122 +12100%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	79.50	26.41
1440p	79.50	35.49
4K	159.00	38.11

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

70−75

+0%

70−75

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Battlefield 5	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Far Cry 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Hitman 3	85−90 +0%	85−90 +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	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Battlefield 5	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Far Cry 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Hitman 3	85−90 +0%	85−90 +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	293 +0%	293 +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	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Far Cry 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Hitman 3	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	224 +0%	224 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	288 +0%	288 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	180 +0%	180 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +0%	130−140 +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	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%
Hitman 3	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	210 +0%	210 +0%
Metro Exodus	63 +0%	63 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	247 +0%	247 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	190−200 +0%	190−200 +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	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%
Metro Exodus	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	146 +0%	146 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	149 +0%	149 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40

+0%

35−40

+0%

This is how NVS 315 and RTX A6000 compete in popular games:

RTX A6000 is 8700% faster in 1080p
RTX A6000 is 6450% faster in 1440p
RTX A6000 is 12100% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.90	58.60
Recency	10 March 2013	5 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	48 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	19 Watt	300 Watt

NVS 315 has 1478.9% lower power consumption.

RTX A6000, on the other hand, has a 6411.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 4700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 400% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX A6000 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.