T550 Mobile vs Quadro NVS 160M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro NVS 160M and T550 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
T550 Mobile outperforms NVS 160M by a whopping 3163% 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 | 1325 | 439 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.22 | 37.86 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Turing (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | G98 | TU117 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 15 August 2008 (16 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 cores | 8 | 1024 |
| Core clock speed | 580 MHz | 1065 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1665 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 210 million | 4,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 23 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.640 | 106.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.0232 TFLOPS | 3.41 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 32 |
| TMUs | 8 | 64 |
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 | medium sized |
| Interface | MXM-I | PCIe 3.0 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 | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 11.2 GB/s | 96 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| 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.
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
−5000%
| 51
+5000%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−475%
|
21−24
+475%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1150%
|
50−55
+1150%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−475%
|
21−24
+475%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−500%
|
40−45
+500%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−300%
|
100−110
+300%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−1100%
|
160−170
+1100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−820%
|
92
+820%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1150%
|
50−55
+1150%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−475%
|
21−24
+475%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 24−27 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−500%
|
40−45
+500%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−700%
|
40
+700%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−300%
|
100−110
+300%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−750%
|
85
+750%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−1150%
|
50−55
+1150%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−475%
|
21−24
+475%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−500%
|
40−45
+500%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−300%
|
20
+300%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−300%
|
100−110
+300%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−1000%
|
21−24
+1000%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 0−1 | 85−90 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−1875%
|
75−80
+1875%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−2700%
|
27−30
+2700%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 24−27 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−53.3%
|
21−24
+53.3%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−3000%
|
60−65
+3000%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−1000%
|
10−12
+1000%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−450%
|
10−12
+450%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 41
+0%
|
41
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 38
+0%
|
38
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 45
+0%
|
45
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35
+0%
|
35
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| God of War | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| God of War | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
This is how NVS 160M and T550 Mobile compete in popular games:
- T550 Mobile is 5000% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the T550 Mobile is 3000% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- T550 Mobile is ahead in 29 tests (47%)
- there's a draw in 33 tests (53%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.35 | 11.42 |
| Recency | 15 August 2008 | on May 2022 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 23 Watt |
NVS 160M has 91.7% lower power consumption.
T550 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 3162.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 441.7% more advanced lithography process.
The T550 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 160M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
