GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max-Q vs Quadro NVS 160M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 160M with GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

NVS 160M
2008
256 MB GDDR3, 12 Watt
0.35

RTX 2070 Super Max-Q outperforms NVS 160M by a whopping 10049% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1289142
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.0030.44
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameG98TU104
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date15 August 2008 (16 years ago)2 April 2020 (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 cores82560
Core clock speed580 MHz930 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1155 MHz
Number of transistors210 million13,600 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rate4.640184.8
Floating-point processing power0.0232 TFLOPS5.914 TFLOPS
ROPs464
TMUs8160
Tensor Coresno data320
Ray Tracing Coresno data40

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceMXM-IPCIe 3.0 x16
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 MB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth11.2 GB/s352.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

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

VR Readyno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.140
CUDA1.17.5

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 160M 0.35
RTX 2070 Super Max-Q 35.52
+10049%

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 135
RTX 2070 Super Max-Q 13689
+10040%

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 HD1−2
−10400%
105
+10400%
1440p0−170
4K-0−147

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3000%
60−65
+3000%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−3200%
99
+3200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−4950%
101
+4950%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3000%
60−65
+3000%
Hitman 3 4−5
−2475%
103
+2475%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1800%
150−160
+1800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−3100%
120−130
+3100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−339%
120−130
+339%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−2433%
75−80
+2433%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−4450%
91
+4450%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3000%
60−65
+3000%
Hitman 3 4−5
−2450%
102
+2450%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1800%
150−160
+1800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−3100%
120−130
+3100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−722%
70−75
+722%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−339%
120−130
+339%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1967%
62
+1967%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−3300%
68
+3300%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3000%
60−65
+3000%
Hitman 3 4−5
−2050%
86
+2050%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1200%
104
+1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−3100%
120−130
+3100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−733%
75
+733%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−111%
59
+111%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 27−30
Hitman 3 6−7
−650%
45−50
+650%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−3750%
75−80
+3750%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3450%
71
+3450%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−3100%
32
+3100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 21−24

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−1700%
36
+1700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 81
+0%
81
+0%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 127
+0%
127
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 137
+0%
137
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Metro Exodus 144
+0%
144
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 109
+0%
109
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 70
+0%
70
+0%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 108
+0%
108
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 97
+0%
97
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Metro Exodus 142
+0%
142
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 91
+0%
91
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60
+0%
60
+0%
Far Cry 5 76
+0%
76
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 92
+0%
92
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 64
+0%
64
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 47
+0%
47
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50
+0%
50
+0%
Far Cry 5 54
+0%
54
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Metro Exodus 75
+0%
75
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35
+0%
35
+0%
Hitman 3 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 61
+0%
61
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51
+0%
51
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 29
+0%
29
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 28
+0%
28
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how NVS 160M and RTX 2070 Super Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2070 Super Max-Q is 10400% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RTX 2070 Super Max-Q is 4950% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 2070 Super Max-Q is ahead in 29 tests (41%)
  • there's a draw in 41 test (59%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.35 35.52
Recency 15 August 2008 2 April 2020
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 80 Watt

NVS 160M has 566.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 2070 Super Max-Q, on the other hand, has a 10048.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 441.7% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 160M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 160M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max-Q is a mobile workstation one.


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

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 RTX 2070 Super Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max-Q

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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
4.8 504 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.