ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3470 vs Quadro NVS 295

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 295 with Mobility Radeon HD 3470, including specs and performance data.

NVS 295
2009
256 MB GDDR3, 23 Watt
0.26
+18.2%

NVS 295 outperforms ATI Mobility HD 3470 by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13901414
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.861.40
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameG98M82
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date7 May 2009 (16 years ago)7 January 2008 (17 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 cores840
Core clock speed540 MHz680 MHz
Number of transistors210 million181 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt12 Watt
Texture fill rate4.3202.720
Floating-point processing power0.0208 TFLOPS0.0544 TFLOPS
ROPs44
TMUs84

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 x16MXM-II
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 typeGDDR3DDR2
Maximum RAM amount256 MB256 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed695 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth11.12 GB/s6.4 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 Connectors2x DisplayPortNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)10.1
Shader Model4.04.1
OpenGL3.33.3
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.1-

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 295 0.26
+18.2%
ATI Mobility HD 3470 0.22

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
+19.4%
ATI Mobility HD 3470 93

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 Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
God of War 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
God of War 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
God of War 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
God of War 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 25 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.26 0.22
Recency 7 May 2009 7 January 2008
Chip lithography 65 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 12 Watt

NVS 295 has a 18.2% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

ATI Mobility HD 3470, on the other hand, has a 18.2% more advanced lithography process, and 91.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro NVS 295 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 3470 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 295 is a workstation graphics card while Mobility Radeon HD 3470 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
ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3470
Mobility Radeon HD 3470

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.


2.9 19 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 62 votes

Rate Mobility Radeon HD 3470 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 Mobility Radeon HD 3470, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.