NVIDIA NVS 5400M vs NVIDIA NVS 3100M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA NVS 5400M and NVIDIA NVS 3100M 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 5400M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 4 month(s) later
- Around 9% higher core clock speed: 660 MHz vs 606 MHz
- 2.2x more texture fill rate: 10.56 GTexel / s vs 4.85 GTexel / s
- 6x more pipelines: 96 vs 16
- 5.4x better floating-point performance: 253.4 gflops vs 46.98 gflops
- 4x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 512 MB
- Around 14% higher memory clock speed: 1800 MHz vs 1580 MHz
- 5.3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 620 vs 118
- 5.5x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 186 vs 34
- 2.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1652 vs 578
- 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2282 vs 988
- 2.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1652 vs 578
- 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2282 vs 988
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 1 June 2012 vs 7 January 2010 |
Core clock speed | 660 MHz vs 606 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 10.56 GTexel / s vs 4.85 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 96 vs 16 |
Floating-point performance | 253.4 gflops vs 46.98 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 512 MB |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz vs 1580 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 620 vs 118 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 186 vs 34 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1652 vs 578 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2282 vs 988 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1652 vs 578 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2282 vs 988 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA NVS 3100M
- 2.5x lower typical power consumption: 14 Watt vs 35 Watt
- Around 37% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 2905 vs 2127
Specifications (specs) | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 14 Watt vs 35 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2905 vs 2127 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA NVS 5400M
GPU 2: NVIDIA NVS 3100M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA NVS 5400M | NVIDIA NVS 3100M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 620 | 118 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 186 | 34 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2127 | 2905 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 5.068 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 229.562 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.635 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 11.384 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 19.696 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1069 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1652 | 578 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2282 | 988 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1069 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1652 | 578 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2282 | 988 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA NVS 5400M | NVIDIA NVS 3100M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Fermi | Tesla 2.0 |
Code name | GF108 | GT218 |
Launch date | 1 June 2012 | 7 January 2010 |
Place in performance rating | 1439 | 1646 |
Type | Mobile workstation | Mobile workstation |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 660 MHz | 606 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 253.4 gflops | 46.98 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 96 | 16 |
Texture fill rate | 10.56 GTexel / s | 4.85 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt | 14 Watt |
Transistor count | 585 million | 260 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | MXM | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 10.1 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 512 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 28.8 GB / s | 12.64 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1580 MHz |
Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR3, DDR3 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
CUDA | ||
DirectCompute | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
Optimus |