NVS 510 vs GeForce RTX 2060
NVS 510
Popular choices:
GeForce RTX 2060
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The NVS 510 is positioned at rank #321 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar NVS 510
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 2060 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce RTX 2060 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The NVS 510 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce RTX 2060 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1975.6% higher G3D Mark score and 200% more VRAM (6 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the NVS 510.
| Insight | NVS 510 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1975.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1975.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 2 Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (6 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce RTX 2060 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $120 (vs $15), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 159.4% better value per dollar than the NVS 510.
| Insight | NVS 510 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+159.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($15) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($120) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of NVS 510 and GeForce RTX 2060
NVS 510
The NVS 510 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 4 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 902 MHz to 1033 MHz. It has 512 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 68W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 680 points.
GeForce RTX 2060
The GeForce RTX 2060 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 7 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1365 MHz to 1680 MHz. It has 1920 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 160W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 30 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 14,114 points. Launch price was $349.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the NVS 510 scores 680 versus the GeForce RTX 2060's 14,114 — the GeForce RTX 2060 leads by 1975.6%. The NVS 510 is built on Maxwell while the GeForce RTX 2060 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 512 (NVS 510) vs 1,920 (GeForce RTX 2060). Raw compute: 1.058 TFLOPS ×2 (NVS 510) vs 6.451 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 2060). Boost clocks: 1033 MHz vs 1680 MHz.
| Feature | NVS 510 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 680 | 14,114+1976% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 512 ×2 | 1920+275% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.058 TFLOPS ×2 | 6.451 TFLOPS+510% |
| Boost Clock | 1033 MHz | 1680 MHz+63% |
| ROPs | 16 ×2 | 48+200% |
| TMUs | 32 ×2 | 120+275% |
| L1 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1.9 MB+660% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 3 MB+200% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | NVS 510 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 2.0 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 / AFMF (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The NVS 510 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 2060 has 6 GB. The GeForce RTX 2060 offers 200% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (NVS 510) vs 3 MB (GeForce RTX 2060) — the GeForce RTX 2060 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | NVS 510 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 6 GB+200% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 192-bit+200% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 3 MB+200% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (NVS 510) vs 12 Ultimate (12_2) (GeForce RTX 2060). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | NVS 510 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.3+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 1st Gen NVENC (NVS 510) vs NVENC (Turing) (GeForce RTX 2060). Decoder: 1st Gen NVDEC (VP5) vs NVDEC (Turing). Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (NVS 510) vs H.264,H.265,VP9,VP8,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce RTX 2060).
| Feature | NVS 510 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 1st Gen NVENC | NVENC (Turing) |
| Decoder | 1st Gen NVDEC (VP5) | NVDEC (Turing) |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 | H.264,H.265,VP9,VP8,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The NVS 510 draws 68W versus the GeForce RTX 2060's 160W — a 80.7% difference. The NVS 510 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (NVS 510) vs 500W (GeForce RTX 2060). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 8-pin. Card length: 160mm vs 229mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 65°C vs 72.
| Feature | NVS 510 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 68W-57% | 160W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-30% | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 8-pin |
| Length | 160mm | 229mm |
| Height | 69mm | 113mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 65°C-10% | 72 |
| Perf/Watt | 10.0 | 88.2+782% |
Value Analysis
The NVS 510 launched at $449 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the GeForce RTX 2060 launched at $349 and now averages $120. The NVS 510 costs 87.5% less ($105 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 45.3 (NVS 510) vs 117.6 (GeForce RTX 2060) — the GeForce RTX 2060 offers 159.6% better value. The GeForce RTX 2060 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).
| Feature | NVS 510 | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $449 | $349-22% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15-88% | $120 |
| Performance per Dollar | 45.3 | 117.6+160% |
| Codename | GM107 | TU106 |
| Release | November 4 2015 | January 7 2019 |
| Ranking | #826 | #168 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on NVS 510 and GeForce RTX 2060
