NVIDIA GeForce 210 vs NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 210 and NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).

NVIDIA GeForce 210

NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 210

Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 1 month(s) later
2.4x more core clock speed: 1402 MHz vs 580 MHz
2x more pipelines: 16 vs 8
Around 70% better floating-point performance: 39.36 gflops vs 23.2 gflops
A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 40 nm vs 65 nm
2x more maximum memory size: 512 MB vs 256 MB
Around 11% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 30 vs 27

Specifications (specs)
Launch date	12 October 2009 vs 15 August 2008
Core clock speed	1402 MHz vs 580 MHz
Pipelines	16 vs 8
Floating-point performance	39.36 gflops vs 23.2 gflops
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm vs 65 nm
Maximum memory size	512 MB vs 256 MB
Benchmarks
PassMark - G2D Mark	30 vs 27

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M

Around 12% higher texture fill rate: 4.64 GTexel / s vs 4.16 GTexel / s
2.6x lower typical power consumption: 12 Watt vs 30.5 Watt
2.8x more memory clock speed: 1400 MHz vs 500 MHz
Around 12% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 141 vs 126
Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 784 vs 688
Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 784 vs 688

Specifications (specs)
Texture fill rate	4.64 GTexel / s vs 4.16 GTexel / s
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	12 Watt vs 30.5 Watt
Memory clock speed	1400 MHz vs 500 MHz
Benchmarks
PassMark - G3D Mark	141 vs 126
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	784 vs 688
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	784 vs 688

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 210
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M

PassMark - G3D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

126

141

PassMark - G2D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

688

784

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

688

784

Name	NVIDIA GeForce 210	NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M
PassMark - G3D Mark	126	141
PassMark - G2D Mark	30	27
Geekbench - OpenCL	2438
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	497
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	497
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	688	784
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	688	784

Compare specifications (specs)

	NVIDIA GeForce 210	NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M
Essentials
Architecture	Tesla 2.0	Tesla
Code name	GT218	G98
Launch date	12 October 2009	15 August 2008
Launch price (MSRP)	$29.49
Place in performance rating	1674	1679
Price now	$32.99
Type	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Value for money (0-100)	6.81
Technical info
Core clock speed	1402 MHz	580 MHz
CUDA cores	16
Floating-point performance	39.36 gflops	23.2 gflops
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	65 nm
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C
Pipelines	16	8
Texture fill rate	4.16 GTexel / s	4.64 GTexel / s
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	30.5 Watt	12 Watt
Transistor count	260 million	210 million
Video outputs and ports
Audio input for HDMI	Internal
Display Connectors	1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort, 1x VGA, DVIVGADisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536
Multi monitor support
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0
Height	2.731" (6.9 cm)
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	MXM-I
Length	6.60" (16.8 cm)
Supplementary power connectors	None
API support
DirectX	10.1	10.0
OpenGL	3.1	3.3
Memory
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	256 MB
Memory bandwidth	8.0 GB / s	11.2 GB / s
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	500 MHz	1400 MHz
Memory type	GDDR2	GDDR2, GDDR3
Shared memory		0
Technologies
CUDA