NVS 510 vs Quadro NVS 5100M
Aggregated performance score
NVS 510 outperforms Quadro NVS 5100M by 95% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 1083 | 879 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.04 | 0.14 |
| Architecture | GT2xx (2009−2012) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | N10P-NS | GK107 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 7 January 2010 (14 years ago) | 23 October 2012 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $449 |
| Current price | $105 | $61 (0.1x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
NVS 510 has 250% better value for money than NVS 5100M.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 48 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 797 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,270 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 12.75 |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 306.0 gflops |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Quadro NVS 5100M and NVS 510 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 160 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1782 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 28.51 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
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 data | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | no data | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | no data | 3.0 |
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 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 9−10
−77.8%
|
16−18
+77.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Hitman 3 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 9−10
−77.8%
|
16−18
+77.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Hitman 3 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Hitman 3 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
−75%
|
14−16
+75%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Hitman 3 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.93 | 1.81 |
| Recency | 7 January 2010 | 23 October 2012 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
The NVS 510 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 5100M in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro NVS 5100M is a mobile workstation card while NVS 510 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
