NVS 810 vs Radeon 520

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon 520 with NVS 810, including specs and performance data.

Radeon 520
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
2.04

NVS 810 outperforms 520 by an impressive 50% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking876764
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.843.14
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameBanksGM107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date18 April 2017 (7 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 cores320512
Core clock speed1030 MHz902 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1033 MHz
Number of transistors690 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt68 Watt
Texture fill rate20.6033.06
Floating-point processing power0.6592 TFLOPS1.058 TFLOPS
ROPs816
TMUs2032

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 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data198 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1125 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth36 GB/s14.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputs8x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA-5.0

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Radeon 520 2.04
NVS 810 3.06
+50%

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.

Radeon 520 787
NVS 810 1179
+49.8%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD13
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Hitman 3 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−50%
27−30
+50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−38.9%
50−55
+38.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Hitman 3 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−50%
27−30
+50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18
−50%
27−30
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−38.9%
50−55
+38.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Hitman 3 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−50%
27−30
+50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
−50%
9−10
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−38.9%
50−55
+38.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

This is how Radeon 520 and NVS 810 compete in popular games:

  • NVS 810 is 38% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.04 3.06
Recency 18 April 2017 4 November 2015
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 68 Watt

Radeon 520 has an age advantage of 1 year, and 36% lower power consumption.

NVS 810, on the other hand, has a 50% higher aggregate performance score.

The NVS 810 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 520 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon 520 is a notebook card while NVS 810 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


AMD Radeon 520
Radeon 520
NVIDIA NVS 810
NVS 810

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3 334 votes

Rate Radeon 520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 8 votes

Rate NVS 810 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.