Quadro FX 4500 vs Quadro NVS 510M

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. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro NVS 510M

#108

Quadro M6000

MSRP: $4999|Avg: $500

99%

#109

Quadro M6000 24GB

MSRP: $4999|Avg: $600

98%

#110

Quadro GV100

MSRP: $8999|Avg: $8999

89%

#257

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

6207%

#272

GRID M6-8Q

MSRP: $1500|Avg: $100

100%

#273

Quadro NVS 510M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#275

GRID K120Q

MSRP: $125|Avg: $20

98%

#277

Tesla M60

MSRP: $3000|Avg: $250

98%

#278

FirePro V7900

MSRP: $999|Avg: $120

95%

#279

GRID M60-8A

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $120

93%

#280

GRID P6-4Q

MSRP: $2000|Avg: $150

93%

#282

Quadro K4000

MSRP: $1269|Avg: $100

90%

#284

GRID P4-2Q

MSRP: $1500|Avg: $235

89%

#286

Tesla C2070

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $38

87%

#287

Quadro 2000 D

MSRP: $599|Avg: $35

87%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro NVS 510M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 4.8% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (1 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 4500.

Insight	Quadro FX 4500	Quadro NVS 510M
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-4.8%)	✅Leading raw performance (+4.8%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro NVS 510M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

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.

Quadro FX 4500 Benchmark Check

Quadro NVS 510M Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Quadro FX 4500 and Quadro NVS 510M

Quadro FX 4500

The Quadro FX 4500 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 610 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 189W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 227 points. Launch price was $3,499.

Quadro NVS 510M

The Quadro NVS 510M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 22 2011. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 450 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 238 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro FX 4500 scores 227 and the Quadro NVS 510M reaches 238 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 4500 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Quadro NVS 510M uses Fermi 2.0, both on 55 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 4500) vs 384 (Quadro NVS 510M). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 4500) vs 0.6912 TFLOPS (Quadro NVS 510M).

Feature	Quadro FX 4500	Quadro NVS 510M
G3D Mark Score	227	238+5%
Architecture	Tesla 2.0	Fermi 2.0
Process Node	55 nm	40 nm
Shading Units	240	384+60%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.6221 TFLOPS	0.6912 TFLOPS+11%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	80+67%	48
L2 Cache	256 KB	512 KB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro FX 4500	Quadro NVS 510M
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro FX 4500 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro NVS 510M has 1 GB. The Quadro NVS 510M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Quadro FX 4500) vs 512 KB (Quadro NVS 510M) — the Quadro NVS 510M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro FX 4500	Quadro NVS 510M
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	1 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	256 KB	512 KB+100%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro FX 4500 draws 189W versus the Quadro NVS 510M's 100W — a 61.6% difference. The Quadro NVS 510M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 4500) vs 350W (Quadro NVS 510M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.