Quadro FX 1300 vs NVS 510

Place in the ranking	987	1526
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.04	no data
Power efficiency	3.58	0.11
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code name	GK107	NV38
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	23 October 2012 (13 years ago)	9 August 2004 (21 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$449	$599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

NVS 510 and FX 1300 have a nearly equal value for money.

Performance to price scatter graph

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	192	no data
Core clock speed	797 MHz	350 MHz
Number of transistors	1,270 million	135 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	55 Watt
Texture fill rate	12.75	2.800
Floating-point processing power	0.306 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	4
TMUs	16	8
L1 Cache	16 KB	no data
L2 Cache	256 KB	no data

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 1.0 x16
Length	160 mm	241 mm
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	DDR
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	128 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	891 MHz	275 MHz
Memory bandwidth	28.51 GB/s	17.6 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors

4x mini-DisplayPort

2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API and SDK support

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	9.0a
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.6	2.1
OpenCL	1.2	N/A
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/A
CUDA	3.0	-

Synthetic benchmarks

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 510 1.63
+1938%

FX 1300 0.08

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 510 680
+1900%

Samples: 368

FX 1300 34
Samples: 9

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	1.63	0.08
Recency	23 October 2012	9 August 2004
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	128 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	55 Watt

NVS 510 has a 1937.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 57.1% lower power consumption.

The NVS 510 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 1300 in performance tests.