RTX A2000 Mobile vs NVS 510

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GRID K1 NVS 510 Quadro 410 Quadro K420 Quadro K600 Quadro K2000
VS
RTX A1000 Mobile RTX A2000 Embedded RTX A2000 Max-Q RTX A2000 Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 510 with RTX A2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

NVS 510
2012
2 GB DDR3, 35 Watt
1.79

RTX A2000 Mobile outperforms NVS 510 by a whopping 1341% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

NVS 510 NVS 510
RTX A2000 Mobile RTX A2000 Mobile

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking926215
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.11no data
Power efficiency3.5318.73
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGK107GA106
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)12 April 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores1922560
Core clock speed797 MHz893 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1358 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million13,250 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt95 Watt
Texture fill rate12.75108.6
Floating-point processing power0.306 TFLOPS6.953 TFLOPS
ROPs1648
TMUs1680
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Coresno data20

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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length160 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed891 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.51 GB/s176.0 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 Connectors4x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2
CUDA3.08.6

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 510 1.79
RTX A2000 Mobile 25.80
+1341%

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 510 689
RTX A2000 Mobile 9915
+1339%

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 HD5−6
−1480%
79
+1480%
1440p2−3
−2050%
43
+2050%
4K2−3
−1750%
37
+1750%

Cost per frame, $

1080p89.80no data
1440p224.50no data
4K224.50no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 74
+0%
74
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 31
+0%
31
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 135
+0%
135
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 72
+0%
72
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Valorant 110
+0%
110
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 25
+0%
25
+0%
Dota 2 119
+0%
119
+0%
Far Cry 5 88
+0%
88
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 108
+0%
108
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 106
+0%
106
+0%
Metro Exodus 53
+0%
53
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Valorant 69
+0%
69
+0%
World of Tanks 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20
+0%
20
+0%
Dota 2 129
+0%
129
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 94
+0%
94
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 50
+0%
50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 50
+0%
50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
World of Tanks 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
+0%
13
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 63
+0%
63
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 49
+0%
49
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Dota 2 44
+0%
44
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 44
+0%
44
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 44
+0%
44
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 72
+0%
72
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35
+0%
35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

This is how NVS 510 and RTX A2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX A2000 Mobile is 1480% faster in 1080p
  • RTX A2000 Mobile is 2050% faster in 1440p
  • RTX A2000 Mobile is 1750% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 1.79 25.80
Recency 23 October 2012 12 April 2021
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 95 Watt

NVS 510 has 171.4% lower power consumption.

RTX A2000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 1341.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 510 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 510 is a workstation card while RTX A2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation 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 510
NVS 510
NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile
RTX A2000 Mobile
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

NVS 510 NVS 510
vs
FX 4700 X2 Quadro FX 4700 X2
RTX A2000 Mobile RTX A2000 Mobile
vs
RTX 3000 Mobile Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile
NVS 510 NVS 510
vs
GRID K140Q GRID K140Q
Tesla K20c Tesla K20c
vs
Tesla T4 Tesla T4
Tesla K20X Tesla K20X
vs
RTX A2000 12 GB RTX A2000 12 GB
NVS 510 NVS 510
vs
GTX 1050 3 GB Max-Q GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB Max-Q
NVS 510 NVS 510
vs
RTX 3070 GeForce RTX 3070
NVS 510 NVS 510
vs
Iris Xe MAX Graphics Iris Xe MAX Graphics
Quadro K5000 Quadro K5000
vs
RTX 2070 Max-Q Refresh GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q Refresh
Quadro K5000 Quadro K5000
vs
RTX 5060 Mobile GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile
Quadro 410 Quadro 410
vs
HD 8570 OEM Rebrand Radeon HD 8570 OEM Rebrand
Quadro 410 Quadro 410
vs
FX Go5700 GeForce FX Go5700
Quadro 410 Quadro 410
vs
ATI HD 4250 IGP Radeon HD 4250 IGP

Community ratings

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

2.9 60 votes

Rate NVS 510 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 96 votes

Rate RTX A2000 Mobile 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.