Arc A550M vs Quadro NVS 295

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
210S 280 AGP 280 PCI 280 PCIe 280 SD 285 290 295
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
A350M A370M A380M A530M A550M A570M A730M A770M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 295 with Arc A550M, including specs and performance data.

NVS 295
2009
256 MB GDDR3, 23 Watt
0.25

A550M outperforms 295 by a whopping 8480% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
NVS 295 NVS 295
Arc A550M Arc A550M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1399272
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.8828.78
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameG98DG2-512
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date7 May 2009 (16 years ago)2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$54.50 no data

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 speed540 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2050 MHz
Number of transistors210 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate4.320262.4
Floating-point processing power0.0208 TFLOPS8.397 TFLOPS
ROPs464
TMUs8128
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Coresno data16
L1 Cacheno data3 MB
L2 Cache16 KB8 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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed695 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth11.12 GB/s224.0 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 Connectors2x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent

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
CUDA1.1-
DLSS-+

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.25 21.45
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 60 Watt

NVS 295 has 160.9% lower power consumption.

Arc A550M, on the other hand, has a 8480% higher aggregate performance score, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A550M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 295 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 295 is a workstation graphics card while Arc A550M is a notebook 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 295
Quadro NVS 295
Intel Arc A550M
Arc A550M
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

NVS 295 Quadro NVS 295
vs
FX 370 LP Quadro FX 370 LP
Arc A550M Arc A550M
vs
RTX 3050 6GB Mobile GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile
NVS 295 Quadro NVS 295
vs
NVS 420 Quadro NVS 420
HD 7450 OEM HD 7450 OEM
vs
Quadro 600 600
GT 730A GT 730A
vs
Quadro 600 600
RX 6600 RX 6600
vs
Quadro 600 600
RX 9060 XT 16 GB RX 9060 XT 16 GB
vs
Quadro 600 600
HD Graphics 530 HD Graphics 530
vs
Quadro 4000 4000
RTX 3050 OEM RTX 3050 OEM
vs
FX 580 FX 580
RTX 5080 RTX 5080
vs
FX 580 FX 580
RTX 5050 RTX 5050
vs
FX 1800 FX 1800
ATI V4800 V4800
vs
FX 380 FX 380
H200 NVL H200 NVL
vs
FX 1700 Mac Edition FX 1700 Mac Edition

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3 20 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 295 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 90 votes

Rate Arc A550M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro NVS 295 or Arc A550M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.