GeForce RTX 3070 vs Quadro NVS 295

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 295 with GeForce RTX 3070, including specs and performance data.

NVS 295
2009
256 MB GDDR3, 23 Watt
0.25

3070 outperforms 295 by a whopping 19972% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking139863
Place by popularitynot in top-10035
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data50.96
Power efficiency0.8818.36
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameG98GA104
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date7 May 2009 (16 years ago)1 September 2020 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$54.50 $499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

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 cores85888
Core clock speed540 MHz1500 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1725 MHz
Number of transistors210 million17,400 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt220 Watt
Texture fill rate4.320317.4
Floating-point processing power0.0208 TFLOPS20.31 TFLOPS
ROPs496
TMUs8184
Tensor Coresno data184
Ray Tracing Coresno data46
L1 Cacheno data5.8 MB
L2 Cache16 KB4 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 mm242 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 12-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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed695 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth11.12 GB/s448.0 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 DisplayPort1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

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 Model4.06.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA1.18.5
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.

NVS 295 0.25
RTX 3070 50.18
+19972%

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 295 111
Samples: 337
RTX 3070 22188
+19889%
Samples: 30581

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 HD0−1148
1440p-0−199
4K-0−163

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.37
1440pno data5.04
4Kno data7.92

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 147
+0%
147
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 149
+0%
149
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 330
+0%
330
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 139
+0%
139
+0%
Far Cry 5 154
+0%
154
+0%
Fortnite 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 159
+0%
159
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 125
+0%
125
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 132
+0%
132
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 257
+0%
257
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 126
+0%
126
+0%
Dota 2 133
+0%
133
+0%
Far Cry 5 148
+0%
148
+0%
Fortnite 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 148
+0%
148
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 139
+0%
139
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 105
+0%
105
+0%
Metro Exodus 120
+0%
120
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 230
+0%
230
+0%
Valorant 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 119
+0%
119
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 102
+0%
102
+0%
Dota 2 125
+0%
125
+0%
Far Cry 5 141
+0%
141
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 81
+0%
81
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 121
+0%
121
+0%
Valorant 237
+0%
237
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 167
+0%
167
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 98
+0%
98
+0%
Metro Exodus 75
+0%
75
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 103
+0%
103
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 62
+0%
62
+0%
Far Cry 5 125
+0%
125
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 63
+0%
63
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 43
+0%
43
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 117
+0%
117
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 49
+0%
49
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90
+0%
90
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 70
+0%
70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30
+0%
30
+0%
Dota 2 125
+0%
125
+0%
Far Cry 5 70
+0%
70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 35
+0%
35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.25 50.18
Recency 7 May 2009 1 September 2020
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 220 Watt

NVS 295 has 856.5% lower power consumption.

RTX 3070, on the other hand, has a 19972% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 712.5% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3070 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 GeForce RTX 3070 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 295
Quadro NVS 295
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070
GeForce RTX 3070

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.


3 20 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 13443 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3070 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 GeForce RTX 3070, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.