Radeon RX 6600 XT vs Quadro NVS 135M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 135M with Radeon RX 6600 XT, including specs and performance data.

NVS 135M
2007
256 MB GDDR3, 10 Watt
0.12

6600 XT outperforms 135M by a whopping 32683% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1506125
Place by popularitynot in top-10079
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data51.98
Power efficiency0.9218.93
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameG86Navi 23
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date9 May 2007 (19 years ago)30 July 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$379

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

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 cores162048
Core clock speed400 MHz1968 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2589 MHz
Number of transistors210 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate3.200331.4
Floating-point processing power0.0256 TFLOPS10.6 TFLOPS
ROPs464
TMUs8128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32
L0 Cacheno data512 KB
L1 Cacheno data512 KB
L2 Cache16 KB2 MB
L3 Cacheno data32 MB

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data190 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed594 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth9.504 GB/s256.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA1.1-

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 135M 0.12
RX 6600 XT 39.34
+32683%

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 135M 50
Samples: 159
RX 6600 XT 16446
+32792%
Samples: 6577

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-0−1124
1440p-0−168
4K-0−140

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.06
1440pno data5.57
4Kno data9.48

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 79

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 78
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−5000%
150−160
+5000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−2114%
150−160
+2114%
Valorant 24−27
−858%
230−240
+858%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−12
−2436%
270−280
+2436%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 76
Dota 2 8−9
−2025%
170
+2025%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−5000%
150−160
+5000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−2114%
150−160
+2114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−3420%
176
+3420%
Valorant 24−27
−858%
230−240
+858%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 69
Dota 2 8−9
−1400%
120
+1400%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−5000%
150−160
+5000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−2114%
150−160
+2114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−1880%
99
+1880%
Valorant 24−27
−858%
230−240
+858%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−4950%
100−110
+4950%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−17400%
170−180
+17400%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−11300%
110−120
+11300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−7500%
75−80
+7500%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−357%
64
+357%
Valorant 1−2
−24100%
240−250
+24100%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−5400%
55−60
+5400%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−2500%
50−55
+2500%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Far Cry 5 151
+0%
151
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 159
+0%
159
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Far Cry 5 141
+0%
141
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 142
+0%
142
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 135
+0%
135
+0%
Metro Exodus 95
+0%
95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 133
+0%
133
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 68
+0%
68
+0%
Metro Exodus 56
+0%
56
+0%
Valorant 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
+0%
40
+0%
Far Cry 5 105
+0%
105
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 34
+0%
34
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 54
+0%
54
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+0%
14
+0%
Dota 2 86
+0%
86
+0%
Far Cry 5 51
+0%
51
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

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

  • in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6600 XT is 24100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6600 XT performs better in 22 tests (39%)
  • there's a draw in 34 tests (61%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.12 39.34
Recency 9 May 2007 30 July 2021
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 80 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 160 Watt

NVS 135M has 1500% lower power consumption.

RX 6600 XT, on the other hand, has a 32683% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1043% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6600 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 135M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 135M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6600 XT is a desktop one.

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.


2.7 20 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 135M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 5588 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6600 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro NVS 135M or Radeon RX 6600 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.