Radeon HD 2900 XT vs NVS 510
Radeon HD 2900 XT
Popular choices:
NVS 510
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. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Radeon HD 2900 XT is positioned at rank 666 and the NVS 510 is on rank 321, so the NVS 510 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 2900 XT
Performance Per Dollar NVS 510
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The NVS 510 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (2 GB vs 1 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD 2900 XT.
| Insight | Radeon HD 2900 XT | NVS 510 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The NVS 510 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the NVS 510 holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $20), it costs 25% less, resulting in a 37.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon HD 2900 XT | NVS 510 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+37.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($20) | ✅More affordable ($15) |
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon HD 2900 XT and NVS 510
Radeon HD 2900 XT
The Radeon HD 2900 XT is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 7 2013. It features the TeraScale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 725 MHz. It has 480 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 25W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 660 points.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon HD 2900 XT scores 660 and the NVS 510 reaches 680 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 2900 XT is built on TeraScale 2 while the NVS 510 uses Maxwell, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 480 (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs 512 (NVS 510). Raw compute: 0.696 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs 1.058 TFLOPS ×2 (NVS 510).
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | NVS 510 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 660 | 680+3% |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 480 | 512 ×2+7% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.696 TFLOPS | 1.058 TFLOPS ×2+52% |
| ROPs | 8 | 16 ×2+100% |
| TMUs | 24 | 32 ×2+33% |
| L1 Cache | 48 KB | 256 KB+433% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | NVS 510 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon HD 2900 XT comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the NVS 510 has 2 GB. The NVS 510 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs 1 MB (NVS 510) — the NVS 510 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | NVS 510 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 2 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.0 (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs 12 (11_0) (NVS 510). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | NVS 510 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.0 | 12 (11_0)+20% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: UVD+ (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs 1st Gen NVENC (NVS 510). Decoder: UVD+ vs 1st Gen NVDEC (VP5). Supported codecs: H.264 (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (NVS 510).
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | NVS 510 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | UVD+ | 1st Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | UVD+ | 1st Gen NVDEC (VP5) |
| Codecs | H.264 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 2900 XT draws 25W versus the NVS 510's 68W — a 92.5% difference. The Radeon HD 2900 XT is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs 350W (NVS 510). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 241mm vs 160mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | NVS 510 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 25W-63% | 68W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 241mm | 160mm |
| Height | — | 69mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | — | 65°C |
| Perf/Watt | 26.4+164% | 10.0 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon HD 2900 XT launched at $399 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the NVS 510 launched at $449 and now averages $15. The NVS 510 costs 25% less ($5 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 33.0 (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs 45.3 (NVS 510) — the NVS 510 offers 37.3% better value. The NVS 510 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2013).
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | NVS 510 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $399-11% | $449 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20 | $15-25% |
| Performance per Dollar | 33.0 | 45.3+37% |
| Codename | Thames | GM107 |
| Release | January 7 2013 | November 4 2015 |
| Ranking | #883 | #826 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon HD 2900 XT and NVS 510
