NVS 510 vs Quadro NVS 5100M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro NVS 5100M with NVS 510, including specs and performance data.
NVS 510 outperforms NVS 5100M by an impressive 90% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1129 | 930 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.11 |
| Power efficiency | 1.86 | 3.53 |
| Architecture | GT2xx (2010) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | N10P-NS | GK107 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 7 January 2010 (15 years ago) | 23 October 2012 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $449 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 | 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 processing power | no data | 0.306 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 16 |
| TMUs | no data | 16 |
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 | 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 | 891 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 and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D 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 | - | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | - | 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
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
−63.6%
|
18−20
+63.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
−63.6%
|
18−20
+63.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−75%
|
14−16
+75%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
−63.6%
|
18−20
+63.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
−80%
|
18−20
+80%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−75%
|
14−16
+75%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−63.6%
|
18−20
+63.6%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
| World of Tanks | 21−24
−81.8%
|
40−45
+81.8%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
−63.6%
|
18−20
+63.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
−80%
|
18−20
+80%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−75%
|
14−16
+75%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−63.6%
|
18−20
+63.6%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
| World of Tanks | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−80%
|
27−30
+80%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−80%
|
27−30
+80%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−80%
|
27−30
+80%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−80%
|
27−30
+80%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.92 | 1.75 |
| Recency | 7 January 2010 | 23 October 2012 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
NVS 510 has a 90.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
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.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
