UHD Graphics 750 vs Quadro NVS 510M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 510M with UHD Graphics 750, including specs and performance data.

NVS 510M
2006
256 MB GDDR3, 35 Watt
0.57

UHD Graphics 750 outperforms NVS 510M by a whopping 626% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1252707
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.2421.06
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameG71Rocket Lake GT1
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date21 August 2006 (19 years ago)30 March 2021 (4 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 coresno data256
Core clock speed450 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1300 MHz
Number of transistors278 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology90 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate10.8020.80
Floating-point processing powerno data0.6656 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs2416

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16Ring Bus
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount256 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed600 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth19.2 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 (12_1)
Shader Model3.06.4
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.2

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.

NVS 510M 0.57
UHD Graphics 750 4.14
+626%

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 510M 238
UHD Graphics 750 1733
+628%

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 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
God of War 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
God of War 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
God of War 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
God of War 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
God of War 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
God of War 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 57 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.57 4.14
Recency 21 August 2006 30 March 2021
Chip lithography 90 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

UHD Graphics 750 has a 626.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 542.9% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 750 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 510M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 510M is a mobile workstation graphics card while UHD Graphics 750 is a desktop one.

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 510M
Quadro NVS 510M
Intel UHD Graphics 750
UHD Graphics 750

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.


3.7 3 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 510M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 420 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro NVS 510M or UHD Graphics 750, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.