AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL vs NVIDIA Quadro NVS 210S
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL and NVIDIA Quadro NVS 210S videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL
- Videocard is newer: launch date 14 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- 2.2x more core clock speed: 931 MHz vs 425 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 90 nm
- 158x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3791 vs 24
- Around 83% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 484 vs 265
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 1 February 2018 vs 22 December 2003 |
Core clock speed | 931 MHz vs 425 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 90 nm |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3791 vs 24 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 484 vs 265 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro NVS 210S
- 5.9x lower typical power consumption: 11 Watt vs 65 Watt
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 11 Watt vs 65 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro NVS 210S
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL | NVIDIA Quadro NVS 210S |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3791 | 24 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 484 | 265 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 19228 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 58.971 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1235.247 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.195 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 75.289 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 252.311 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6318 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2070 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1514 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6318 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2070 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1514 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2091 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL | NVIDIA Quadro NVS 210S | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Curie |
Code name | Polaris 22 | MCP51 |
Launch date | 1 February 2018 | 22 December 2003 |
Place in performance rating | 634 | 637 |
Type | Laptop | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1011 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 931 MHz | 425 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 2,588 gflops | |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 90 nm |
Pipelines | 1280 | |
Texture fill rate | 80.88 GTexel / s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 11 Watt |
Transistor count | 75 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | IGP | PCI |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 9.0c |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 2.1 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 204.8 GB / s | |
Memory bus width | 1024 Bit | |
Memory clock speed | 1400 MHz | |
Memory type | HBM2 | |
Shared memory | 0 |