GeForce MX570 vs Quadro NVS 160M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 160M with GeForce MX570, including specs and performance data.

NVS 160M
2008
256 MB GDDR3, 12 Watt
0.35

MX570 outperforms 160M by a whopping 3817% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1342406
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.2442.18
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameG98GA107
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date15 August 2008 (17 years ago)May 2022 (3 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 cores82048
Core clock speed580 MHz832 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1155 MHz
Number of transistors210 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate4.64073.92
Floating-point processing power0.0232 TFLOPS4.731 TFLOPS
ROPs440
TMUs864
Tensor Coresno data64
Ray Tracing Coresno data16
L1 Cacheno data2 MB
L2 Cache16 KB2 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).

InterfaceMXM-IPCIe 4.0 x8
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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth11.2 GB/s96 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 outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.6
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.18.6
DLSS-+

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 160M 0.35
GeForce MX570 13.71
+3817%

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 160M 145
Samples: 409
GeForce MX570 5737
+3857%
Samples: 40

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 HD0−138

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2800%
27−30
+2800%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−400%
24−27
+400%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2800%
27−30
+2800%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−1350%
55−60
+1350%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−400%
24−27
+400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−629%
50−55
+629%
Valorant 24−27
−354%
110−120
+354%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
−1257%
190−200
+1257%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2800%
27−30
+2800%
Dota 2 10−11
−800%
90−95
+800%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−1350%
55−60
+1350%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−400%
24−27
+400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−629%
50−55
+629%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−640%
35−40
+640%
Valorant 24−27
−354%
110−120
+354%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2800%
27−30
+2800%
Dota 2 10−11
−800%
90−95
+800%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−1350%
55−60
+1350%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−400%
24−27
+400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−629%
50−55
+629%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−580%
34
+580%
Valorant 24−27
−354%
110−120
+354%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−800%
27−30
+800%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 0−1 100−110
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−3125%
120−130
+3125%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−3300%
30−35
+3300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−1900%
20−22
+1900%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 30−35

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−85.7%
24−27
+85.7%
Valorant 2−3
−3700%
75−80
+3700%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−1200%
12−14
+1200%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 122
+0%
122
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 106
+0%
106
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 54
+0%
54
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High

Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

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

  • in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce MX570 is 3700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GeForce MX570 performs better in 30 tests (47%)
  • there's a draw in 34 tests (53%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.35 13.71
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 25 Watt

NVS 160M has 108.3% lower power consumption.

GeForce MX570, on the other hand, has a 3817.1% higher aggregate performance score, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 712.5% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce MX570 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 160M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 160M is a mobile workstation graphics card while GeForce MX570 is a mobile 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 NVS 160M
Quadro NVS 160M
NVIDIA GeForce MX570
GeForce MX570

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 23 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 160M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 113 votes

Rate GeForce MX570 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro NVS 160M or GeForce MX570, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.