Arc A380 vs Quadro NVS 320M

Place in the ranking	1229	333
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	43.94
Power efficiency	0.61	4.90
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	G84	DG2-128
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	9 June 2007 (17 years ago)	14 June 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores	32	1024
Core clock speed	575 MHz	2000 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2050 MHz
Number of transistors	289 million	7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	80 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	9.200	131.2
Floating-point processing power	0.0736 TFLOPS	4.198 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	32
TMUs	16	64
Tensor Cores	no data	128
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	8

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	large	no data
Interface	MXM-HE	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	no data	222 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 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 type	GDDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	6 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	96 Bit
Memory clock speed	700 MHz	1937 MHz
Memory bandwidth	22.4 GB/s	186.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.0	6.6
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	1.1	-

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

NVS 320M 0.54

Arc A380 16.15
+2891%

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 320M 208

Arc A380 6230
+2895%

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

−4800%

49
+4800%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−2733%

85−90
+2733%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −1425%	61 +1425%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1933%	60−65 +1933%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −2733%	85−90 +2733%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −7500%	75−80 +7500%
Hitman 3	5−6 −1140%	60−65 +1140%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −1220%	130−140 +1220%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −1617%	100−110 +1617%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −277%	110−120 +277%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −1700%	72 +1700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1933%	60−65 +1933%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −2733%	85−90 +2733%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −7500%	75−80 +7500%
Hitman 3	5−6 −1140%	60−65 +1140%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −1220%	130−140 +1220%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −1233%	80 +1233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −530%	60−65 +530%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −277%	110−120 +277%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −625%	29 +625%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1933%	60−65 +1933%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −2733%	85−90 +2733%
Hitman 3	5−6 −1140%	60−65 +1140%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −420%	52 +420%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −917%	61 +917%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −240%	34 +240%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 +20%	25 −20%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−4400%

45−50
+4400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	30−35
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −2600%	27−30 +2600%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −3300%	30−35 +3300%
Hitman 3	6−7 −500%	35−40 +500%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −1967%	60−65 +1967%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −15900%	160−170 +15900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−1567%

50−55
+1567%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −1800%	18−20 +1800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	16−18

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−1200%

24−27
+1200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	50 +0%	50 +0%
Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	37 +0%	37 +0%
Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	31 +0%	31 +0%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	57 +0%	57 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

75−80

+0%

75−80

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5

55−60

+0%

55−60

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Hitman 3	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

This is how NVS 320M and Arc A380 compete in popular games:

Arc A380 is 4800% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the NVS 320M is 20% faster.
in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A380 is 15900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

NVS 320M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
Arc A380 is ahead in 29 tests (45%)
there's a draw in 34 tests (53%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.54	16.15
Recency	9 June 2007	14 June 2022
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	6 GB
Chip lithography	80 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	75 Watt

NVS 320M has 275% lower power consumption.

Arc A380, on the other hand, has a 2890.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A380 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 320M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 320M is a mobile workstation card while Arc A380 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.