NVS 310 vs Quadro FX 880M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 880M with NVS 310, including specs and performance data.

FX 880M
2010
1 GB GDDR3, 35 Watt
0.56

NVS 310 outperforms FX 880M by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12421213
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.04
Power efficiency1.162.35
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGT216GF119
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date7 January 2010 (15 years ago)26 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$159

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores4848
Core clock speed550 MHz523 MHz
Number of transistors486 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate8.8004.184
Floating-point processing power0.1162 TFLOPS0.1004 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs168

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data156 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed790 MHz875 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.28 GB/s14 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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x DisplayPort

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.15.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.22.1

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.

FX 880M 0.56
NVS 310 0.65
+16.1%

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.

FX 880M 230
NVS 310 266
+15.7%

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 HD20
−5%
21−24
+5%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data7.57

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Valorant 27−30
−7.1%
30−33
+7.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 27−30
−7.1%
30−33
+7.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 27−30
−7.1%
30−33
+7.1%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Valorant 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how FX 880M and NVS 310 compete in popular games:

  • NVS 310 is 5% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.56 0.65
Recency 7 January 2010 26 June 2012
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 512 MB
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 20 Watt

FX 880M has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

NVS 310, on the other hand, has a 16.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and 75% lower power consumption.

The NVS 310 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 880M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 880M is a mobile workstation card while NVS 310 is a workstation 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 Quadro FX 880M
Quadro FX 880M
NVIDIA NVS 310
NVS 310

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.


3.3 43 votes

Rate Quadro FX 880M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 89 votes

Rate NVS 310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 880M or NVS 310, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.