Quadro NVS 160M vs Radeon RX Vega 64

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking125not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation23.92no data
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameVegaG98
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date14 August 2017 (7 years ago)15 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores40968
Core clock speed1630 MHz580 MHz
Boost clock speed1546 MHzno data
Number of transistors12,500 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)295 Watt12 Watt
Texture fill rate395.84.640
Floating-point processing power12.66 gflops0.0232 gflops
ROPs644
TMUs2568

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 x16MXM-I
Length279 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinno data

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 typeHBM2GDDR2, GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount8 GB256 MB
Memory bus width2048 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed945 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidth483.8 GB/s11.2 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.1.125N/A
CUDA-1.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


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.

RX Vega 64 14335
+10519%
NVS 160M 135

Pros & cons summary


Recency 14 August 2017 15 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 295 Watt 12 Watt

RX Vega 64 has an age advantage of 8 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 160M, on the other hand, has 2358.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 64 and Quadro NVS 160M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 64 is a desktop card while Quadro NVS 160M is a mobile 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 RX Vega 64
Radeon RX Vega 64
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M
Quadro NVS 160M

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.


4.3 667 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 23 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 160M 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.