NVS 315 vs Radeon HD 8570D

Place in performance ranking	1032	1084
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Value for money	0.06	0.02
Architecture	Terascale 3 (2010−2013)	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code name	Richland	GF119
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	26 September 2012 (11 years ago)	10 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$159
Current price	$79	$213 (1.3x MSRP)

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

HD 8570D has 200% better value for money than NVS 315.

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	256	48
Core clock speed	844 MHz	523 MHz
Boost clock speed	868 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,303 million	292 million
Manufacturing process technology	32 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	19 Watt
Texture fill rate	13.89	4.184
Floating-point performance	no data	100.4 gflops

Size and 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).

Interface	IGP	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	145 mm
Width	IGP	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

Memory

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	System Shared	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	1 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	14 GB/s
Shared memory	+	no data

Video outputs and ports

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 outputs

1x DMS-59

API support

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

DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.0	5.1
OpenGL	4.4	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	no data	2.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

HD 8570D 1.15
+29.2%

NVS 315 0.89

Radeon HD 8570D outperforms NVS 315 by 29% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

HD 8570D 444
+28.3%

NVS 315 346

Radeon HD 8570D outperforms NVS 315 by 28% in Passmark.

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 HD

13
+30%

10−12

−30%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4
+50%

2−3

−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Hitman 3	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Hitman 3	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2	0−1
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Hitman 3	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%

This is how HD 8570D and NVS 315 compete in popular games:

HD 8570D is 30% faster than NVS 315 in 1080p

Advantages and disadvantages

Performance score	1.15	0.89
Recency	26 September 2012	10 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	1 GB
Chip lithography	32 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	19 Watt