GeForce GTX 1660 vs Quadro NVS 210S

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 210S with GeForce GTX 1660, including specs and performance data.

NVS 210S
2003
11 Watt
0.06

GTX 1660 outperforms NVS 210S by a whopping 47367% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1508212
Place by popularitynot in top-10039
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data43.67
Power efficiency0.3917.08
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameC51TU116
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date22 December 2003 (21 years ago)14 March 2019 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$219

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 coresno data1408
Core clock speed425 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1785 MHz
Number of transistors75 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)11 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate0.85157.1
Floating-point processing powerno data5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs148
TMUs288

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).

InterfacePCIPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
WidthIGP2-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 typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared6 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared192 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2001 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data192.1 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 outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 (12_1)
Shader Model3.06.5
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA-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.

NVS 210S 0.06
GTX 1660 28.48
+47367%

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 210S 23
GTX 1660 11659
+50591%

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-0−183
1440p-0−150
4K-0−127

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.64
1440pno data4.38
4Kno data8.11

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 68
+0%
68
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 271
+0%
271
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 71
+0%
71
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 55
+0%
55
+0%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 223
+0%
223
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 58
+0%
58
+0%
Far Cry 5 100
+0%
100
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 132
+0%
132
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 100
+0%
100
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 306
+0%
306
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 45
+0%
45
+0%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 107
+0%
107
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 47
+0%
47
+0%
Dota 2 219
+0%
219
+0%
Far Cry 5 92
+0%
92
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 123
+0%
123
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 88
+0%
88
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 115
+0%
115
+0%
Metro Exodus 57
+0%
57
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 102
+0%
102
+0%
Valorant 287
+0%
287
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 45
+0%
45
+0%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
+0%
40
+0%
Dota 2 197
+0%
197
+0%
Far Cry 5 86
+0%
86
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 98
+0%
98
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57
+0%
57
+0%
Valorant 115
+0%
115
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 62
+0%
62
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 52
+0%
52
+0%
Metro Exodus 33
+0%
33
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 129
+0%
129
+0%
Valorant 226
+0%
226
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 30
+0%
30
+0%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+0%
24
+0%
Far Cry 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 76
+0%
76
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
High Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16
+0%
16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 49
+0%
49
+0%
Metro Exodus 20
+0%
20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35
+0%
35
+0%
Valorant 125
+0%
125
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 16
+0%
16
+0%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Dota 2 87
+0%
87
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50
+0%
50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.06 28.48
Recency 22 December 2003 14 March 2019
Chip lithography 90 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 11 Watt 120 Watt

NVS 210S has 990.9% lower power consumption.

GTX 1660, on the other hand, has a 47366.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, and a 650% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1660 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 210S in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 210S is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 1660 is a desktop 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 210S
Quadro NVS 210S
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
GeForce GTX 1660

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.


2.8 12 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 210S on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 5821 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1660 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro NVS 210S or GeForce GTX 1660, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.