NVIDIA NVS 315 vs NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA NVS 315 and NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT 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, 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA NVS 315
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 7 month(s) later
- Around 50% higher pipelines: 48 vs 32
- Around 12% better floating-point performance: 100.4 gflops vs 89.6 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 40 nm vs 55 nm
- 2.6x lower typical power consumption: 19 Watt vs 50 Watt
- 4x more maximum memory size: 1 GB vs 256 / 512 MB
- 2.2x more memory clock speed: 1750 MHz vs 800 (GDDR3) and 500 (DDR2) MHz
- Around 86% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 320 vs 172
- 5.6x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 180 vs 32
- 4.9x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 3.025 vs 0.612
- Around 40% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 79.479 vs 56.838
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 10 March 2013 vs 29 July 2008 |
Pipelines | 48 vs 32 |
Floating-point performance | 100.4 gflops vs 89.6 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm vs 55 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 19 Watt vs 50 Watt |
Maximum memory size | 1 GB vs 256 / 512 MB |
Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz vs 800 (GDDR3) and 500 (DDR2) MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 320 vs 172 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 180 vs 32 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 3.025 vs 0.612 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 79.479 vs 56.838 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT
- 2.7x more core clock speed: 1400 MHz vs 523 MHz
- 2.1x more texture fill rate: 8.8 billion / sec vs 4.184 GTexel / s
- Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1505 vs 1382
- Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1505 vs 1382
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1400 MHz vs 523 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 8.8 billion / sec vs 4.184 GTexel / s |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1505 vs 1382 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1505 vs 1382 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA NVS 315
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA NVS 315 | NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 320 | 172 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 180 | 32 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 882 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 3.025 | 0.612 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 79.479 | 56.838 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.217 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 4.705 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 6.573 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 465 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 942 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1382 | 1505 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 465 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 942 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1382 | 1505 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA NVS 315 | NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Tesla |
Code name | GF119 | G96C |
Launch date | 10 March 2013 | 29 July 2008 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $159 | $85.99 |
Place in performance rating | 1577 | 1666 |
Type | Workstation | Desktop |
Price now | $85.99 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 4.13 | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 523 MHz | 1400 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 100.4 gflops | 89.6 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 55 nm |
Pipelines | 48 | 32 |
Texture fill rate | 4.184 GTexel / s | 8.8 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 19 Watt | 50 Watt |
Transistor count | 292 million | 314 million |
CUDA cores | 32 | |
Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x DMS-59 | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video, Dual Link DVISingle Link DVI |
Audio input for HDMI | S / PDIF | |
HDMI | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | 145 mm | 6.875" (17.5 cm) |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 10.0 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 256 / 512 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 14 GB / s | 25.6 (GDDR3) and 16.0 (DDR2) |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 800 (GDDR3) and 500 (DDR2) MHz |
Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR3 |
Technologies |
||
CUDA | ||
SLI |