GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile vs Quadro NVS 160M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro NVS 160M with GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
RTX 3050 Mobile outperforms 160M by a whopping 6129% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1343 | 289 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 30 |
| Power efficiency | 2.24 | 22.31 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | G98 | GA107 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 August 2008 (17 years ago) | 11 May 2021 (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 cores | 8 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 580 MHz | 712 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1057 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 210 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.640 | 67.65 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.0232 TFLOPS | 4.329 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 40 |
| TMUs | 8 | 64 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 64 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 16 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 2 MB |
| L2 Cache | 16 KB | 2 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).
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Interface | MXM-I | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
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 | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 11.2 GB/s | 192.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
| CUDA | 1.1 | 8.6 |
| 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.
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.
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 | 1−2
−9200%
| 93
+9200%
|
| 1440p | 0−1 | 51 |
| 4K | 0−1 | 32 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−10500%
|
106
+10500%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−8200%
|
83
+8200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−2125%
|
85−90
+2125%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−1129%
|
85−90
+1129%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−508%
|
150−160
+508%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−1679%
|
240−250
+1679%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−6000%
|
61
+6000%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−1590%
|
169
+1590%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−2125%
|
85−90
+2125%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 62 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−1129%
|
85−90
+1129%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−3260%
|
168
+3260%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−508%
|
150−160
+508%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−6000%
|
61
+6000%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−1450%
|
155
+1450%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−2125%
|
85−90
+2125%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−1129%
|
85−90
+1129%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−1200%
|
65
+1200%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−508%
|
150−160
+508%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−1467%
|
45−50
+1467%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 0−1 | 150−160 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−4250%
|
170−180
+4250%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Escape from Tarkov | 2−3
−2350%
|
45−50
+2350%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−5500%
|
55−60
+5500%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−3400%
|
35−40
+3400%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 50−55 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−307%
|
57
+307%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−6350%
|
120−130
+6350%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−2200%
|
21−24
+2200%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1100%
|
24−27
+1100%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 118
+0%
|
118
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 108
+0%
|
108
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 107
+0%
|
107
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 94
+0%
|
94
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 128
+0%
|
128
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 99
+0%
|
99
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 57
+0%
|
57
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 36
+0%
|
36
+0%
|
| Valorant | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30
+0%
|
30
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 68
+0%
|
68
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 23
+0%
|
23
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 44
+0%
|
44
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12
+0%
|
12
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 93
+0%
|
93
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35
+0%
|
35
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
This is how NVS 160M and RTX 3050 Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX 3050 Mobile is 9200% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RTX 3050 Mobile is 10500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 3050 Mobile performs better in 27 tests (44%)
- there's a draw in 34 tests (56%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.35 | 21.80 |
| Recency | 15 August 2008 | 11 May 2021 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 75 Watt |
NVS 160M has 525% lower power consumption.
RTX 3050 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 6128.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 712.5% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile 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 RTX 3050 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
