NVS 510 vs UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) with NVS 510, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
2021
4.71
+162%

UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) outperforms NVS 510 by a whopping 162% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking644923
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.08
ArchitectureGen. 12 (2021−2023)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeGK107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date11 May 2021 (3 years ago)23 October 2012 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$449

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 cores32192
Core clock speed350 MHz797 MHz
Boost clock speed1450 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data35 Watt
Texture fill rateno data12.75
Floating-point processing powerno data0.306 gflops
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data16

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data160 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1782 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data28.51 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 data4x mini-DisplayPort

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.1.126
CUDA-3.0

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 HD17
+183%
6−7
−183%
1440p30
+200%
10−12
−200%
4K11
+175%
4−5
−175%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10
+233%
3−4
−233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 11
+175%
4−5
−175%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+190%
10−11
−190%
Hitman 3 10
+233%
3−4
−233%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+210%
10−11
−210%
Metro Exodus 22
+175%
8−9
−175%
Red Dead Redemption 2 15
+200%
5−6
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Watch Dogs: Legion 47
+194%
16−18
−194%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+190%
10−11
−190%
Hitman 3 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+210%
10−11
−210%
Metro Exodus 16
+167%
6−7
−167%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 17
+183%
6−7
−183%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Watch Dogs: Legion 43
+169%
16−18
−169%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+190%
10−11
−190%
Hitman 3 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10
+233%
3−4
−233%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16
+167%
6−7
−167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
+167%
3−4
−167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+181%
16−18
−181%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Hitman 3 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+200%
10−11
−200%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

This is how UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) and NVS 510 compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 183% faster in 1080p
  • UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 200% faster in 1440p
  • UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 175% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.71 1.80
Recency 11 May 2021 23 October 2012
Chip lithography 10 nm 28 nm

UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) has a 161.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 510 in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is a notebook card while NVS 510 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.


Intel UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
NVIDIA NVS 510
NVS 510

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.


3.1 30 votes

Rate UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 60 votes

Rate NVS 510 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.