UHD Graphics 750 vs NVS 810

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GRID M3-3020 GRID M10-8Q GRID M40 NVS 810 K620 K1200 K2200 Tesla M10
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
630 710 730 750 770 910 920

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 810 with UHD Graphics 750, including specs and performance data.

NVS 810
2015
2 GB DDR3, 68 Watt
2.74

Graphics 750 outperforms NVS 810 by an impressive 51% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
NVS 810 NVS 810
UHD Graphics 750 UHD Graphics 750

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking849728
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.1021.22
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameGM107Rocket Lake GT1
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date4 November 2015 (10 years ago)30 March 2021 (4 years ago)

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 cores512 ×2256
Core clock speed902 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1033 MHz1300 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)68 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate33.06 ×220.80
Floating-point processing power1.058 TFLOPS ×20.6656 TFLOPS
ROPs16 ×28
TMUs32 ×216
L1 Cache256 KBno data
L2 Cache1024 KBno 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16Ring Bus
Length198 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
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 GB ×2System Shared
Memory bus width64 Bit ×2System Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s ×2no data
Shared memoryno data+

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 Connectors8x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs

API and SDK support

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
Vulkan1.1.1261.2
CUDA5.0-

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 810 2.74
UHD Graphics 750 4.14
+51.1%

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 810 1146
Samples: 32
UHD Graphics 750 1733
+51.2%

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 56 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 2.74 4.14
Recency 4 November 2015 30 March 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 68 Watt 15 Watt

UHD Graphics 750 has a 51.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 353.3% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 750 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 810 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 810 is a workstation graphics card while UHD Graphics 750 is a desktop one.

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 810
NVS 810
Intel UHD Graphics 750
UHD Graphics 750
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 810 NVS 810
vs
FX 5800 Quadro FX 5800
UHD Graphics 750 UHD Graphics 750
vs
ATI HD 5830 Radeon HD 5830
NVS 810 NVS 810
vs
GRID K340 GRID K340
NVS 810 NVS 810
vs
UHD Graphics 910 910
NVS 810 NVS 810
vs
RTX 2080 Super 2080 Super
NVS 810 NVS 810
vs
RX 5950 XT 5950 XT
NVS 810 NVS 810
vs
GTX 750 GM206 750 GM206
NVS 810 NVS 810
vs
UHD Graphics G1 G1
NVS 810 NVS 810
vs
8400 SE 8400 SE
NVS 810 NVS 810
vs
RX 6400 6400
NVS 810 NVS 810
vs
RTX 3050 4 GB 3050 4 GB
NVS 810 NVS 810
vs
H100 SXM5 SXM5
NVS 810 NVS 810
vs
H100 SXM5 96 GB 96 GB

Community ratings

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

3.3 8 votes

Rate NVS 810 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 430 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about NVS 810 or UHD Graphics 750, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.