Quadro FX 3500M vs Quadro NVS 5100M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 5100M and Quadro FX 3500M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

NVS 5100M
2010
1 GB DDR3, 35 Watt
0.85
+18.1%

NVS 5100M outperforms FX 3500M 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 ranking11731198
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.11
Power efficiency1.851.22
ArchitectureGT2xx (2010)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameN10P-NSG71
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date7 January 2010 (15 years ago)1 March 2007 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$99.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores4832
Core clock speed550 MHz575 MHz
Boost clock speedno data575 MHz
Number of transistorsno data278 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rateno data13.80
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data24

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
Interfaceno dataMXM-III

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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz600 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data38.4 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX10.19.0c (9_3)
Shader Modelno data3.0
OpenGLno data2.1
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

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 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 30−33
+7.1%
27−30
−7.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
+15%
20−22
−15%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 30−33
+7.1%
27−30
−7.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 30−33
+7.1%
27−30
−7.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
HELLDIVERS 2 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
HELLDIVERS 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

4K
Ultra Preset

HELLDIVERS 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

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

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the NVS 5100M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • NVS 5100M is ahead in 13 tests (43%)
  • there's a draw in 17 tests (57%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.85 0.72
Recency 7 January 2010 1 March 2007
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 45 Watt

NVS 5100M has a 18.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 125% more advanced lithography process, and 28.6% lower power consumption.

The Quadro NVS 5100M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3500M in performance tests.

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 5100M
Quadro NVS 5100M
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3500M
Quadro FX 3500M

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.


1 3 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 5100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Quadro FX 3500M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro NVS 5100M or Quadro FX 3500M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.