NVS 810 vs Quadro NVS 5100M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro NVS 5100M with NVS 810, including specs and performance data.
NVS 810 outperforms NVS 5100M by a whopping 228% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1134 | 777 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.83 | 3.09 |
| Architecture | GT2xx (2010) | Maxwell (2014−2017) |
| GPU code name | N10P-NS | GM107 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 7 January 2010 (15 years ago) | 4 November 2015 (9 years ago) |
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 | 512 ×2 |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 902 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1033 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,870 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 68 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 33.06 ×2 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 1.058 TFLOPS ×2 |
| ROPs | no data | 16 ×2 |
| TMUs | no data | 32 ×2 |
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 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 198 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 ×2 |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit ×2 |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 14.4 GB/s ×2 |
| 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 | 8x 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 | - | 5.0 |
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
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
−200%
|
9−10
+200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
−200%
|
9−10
+200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−220%
|
16−18
+220%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−200%
|
24−27
+200%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−223%
|
100−105
+223%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
−200%
|
9−10
+200%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
−226%
|
75−80
+226%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−221%
|
45−50
+221%
|
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−220%
|
16−18
+220%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−200%
|
24−27
+200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−220%
|
16−18
+220%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−223%
|
100−105
+223%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−221%
|
45−50
+221%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−220%
|
16−18
+220%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−200%
|
24−27
+200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−220%
|
16−18
+220%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−223%
|
100−105
+223%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 4−5
−200%
|
12−14
+200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−200%
|
27−30
+200%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−200%
|
45−50
+200%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−220%
|
16−18
+220%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.81 | 2.66 |
| Recency | 7 January 2010 | 4 November 2015 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 68 Watt |
NVS 5100M has 94.3% lower power consumption.
NVS 810, on the other hand, has a 228.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
The NVS 810 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 810 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
