Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q vs Quadro NVS 130M

Place in the ranking	1363	258
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.72	24.83
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	G86	TU106
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	9 May 2007 (17 years ago)	27 May 2019 (5 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 cores	8	2304
Core clock speed	400 MHz	600 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1215 MHz
Number of transistors	210 million	10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	80 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	60 Watt
Texture fill rate	1.600	175.0
Floating-point processing power	0.0128 TFLOPS	5.599 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	64
TMUs	4	144
Tensor Cores	no data	288
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	36

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 size	no data	large
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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	DDR2	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	6 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	700 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	11.2 GB/s	448.0 GB/s
Shared memory	+	-

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 Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
G-SYNC support	-	+

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model	4.0	6.5
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	1.1	7.5

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 130M 0.25

RTX 3000 Max-Q 21.59
+8536%

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 130M 97

RTX 3000 Max-Q 8302
+8459%

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 HD	0−1	74
1440p	0−1	45
4K	-0−1	33

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −388%	35−40 +388%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −2050%	40−45 +2050%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −388%	35−40 +388%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1200%	26 +1200%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −1740%	90−95 +1740%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −1825%	77 +1825%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −388%	35−40 +388%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1000%	22 +1000%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −1233%	80 +1233%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −1740%	90−95 +1740%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 −2267%	140−150 +2267%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −1125%	45−50 +1125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −1625%	65−70 +1625%
World of Tanks	12−14 −1908%	240−250 +1908%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −388%	35−40 +388%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −800%	18 +800%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −1067%	70−75 +1067%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −1740%	90−95 +1740%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 −2267%	140−150 +2267%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

1−2

−17200%

170−180
+17200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −100%	18−20 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −750%	16−18 +750%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −1400%	60−65 +1400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −1400%	30−33 +1400%
Valorant	4−5 −1600%	68 +1600%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 −333%	65 +333%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −333%	65 +333%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	0−1	65−70
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −333%	65 +333%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	24
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −400%	5 +400%
Dota 2	14−16 −407%	76 +407%
Valorant	0−1	32

Full HD
Low Preset

Elden Ring

70−75

+0%

70−75

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	63 +0%	63 +0%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Valorant	119 +0%	119 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Dota 2	99 +0%	99 +0%
Elden Ring	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Fortnite	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	85 +0%	85 +0%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Valorant	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	56 +0%	56 +0%
Dota 2	120 +0%	120 +0%
Valorant	103 +0%	103 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	49 +0%	49 +0%
Elden Ring	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	49 +0%	49 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
World of Tanks	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45 +0%	45 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Elden Ring	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Fortnite	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 3000 Max-Q is 17200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RTX 3000 Max-Q is ahead in 30 tests (50%)
there's a draw in 30 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.25	21.59
Recency	9 May 2007	27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	6 GB
Chip lithography	80 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	60 Watt

NVS 130M has 500% lower power consumption.

RTX 3000 Max-Q, on the other hand, has a 8536% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 130M in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.