UHD Graphics 605 vs NVS 510

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 510 with UHD Graphics 605, including specs and performance data.

NVS 510
2012
2 GB DDR3, 35 Watt
1.73
+51.8%

NVS 510 outperforms UHD Graphics 605 by an impressive 52% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9301078
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.11no data
Power efficiency3.5316.29
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGK107Gemini Lake GT1.5
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)11 December 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$449 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 cores192144
Core clock speed797 MHz200 MHz
Boost clock speedno data750 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt5 Watt
Texture fill rate12.7513.50
Floating-point processing power0.306 TFLOPS0.216 TFLOPS
ROPs163
TMUs1618

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 x16Ring Bus
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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed891 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth28.51 GB/sno data
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-DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

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
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA3.0-

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 1.73
+51.8%
UHD Graphics 605 1.14

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
+52.1%
UHD Graphics 605 453

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 HD16−18
+45.5%
11
−45.5%
1440p35−40
+45.8%
24
−45.8%
4K21−24
+40%
15
−40%

Cost per frame, $

1080p28.06no data
1440p12.83no data
4K21.38no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 2
+0%
2
+0%
Far Cry 5 5
+0%
5
+0%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5
+0%
5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
World of Tanks 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 7
+0%
7
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
World of Tanks 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Valorant 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how NVS 510 and UHD Graphics 605 compete in popular games:

  • NVS 510 is 45% faster in 1080p
  • NVS 510 is 46% faster in 1440p
  • NVS 510 is 40% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 41 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.73 1.14
Recency 23 October 2012 11 December 2017
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 5 Watt

NVS 510 has a 51.8% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics 605, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 600% lower power consumption.

The NVS 510 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 605 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 510 is a workstation card while UHD Graphics 605 is a notebook 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
Intel UHD Graphics 605
UHD Graphics 605

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.


2.9 60 votes

Rate NVS 510 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 834 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 605 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.