Intel Arctic Sound M vs NVIDIA Quadro NVS 290
We compared two Professional market GPUs: 16GB VRAM Intel Arctic Sound M and 256MB VRAM Quadro NVS 290 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
Intel Arctic Sound M 's Advantages
Released 14 years and 3 months late
More VRAM (16GB vs 256GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (1229GB/s vs 6.400GB/s)
8176 additional rendering cores
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 290 's Advantages
Lower TDP (21W vs 500W)
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
Intel Arctic Sound M
+50762%
14.75 TFLOPS
Quadro NVS 290
0.029 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Jan 2022
Release Date
Oct 2007
Xe Graphics
Generation
Quadro NVS
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 4.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 1.0 x16
Clock Speeds
-
-
-
-
-
-
1200 MHz
Memory Clock
400 MHz
Memory
16GB
Memory Size
256MB
HBM2e
Memory Type
DDR2
4096bit
Memory Bus
64bit
1229GB/s
Bandwidth
6.400GB/s
Render Config
-
-
-
-
SM Count
2
8192
Shading Units
16
256
TMUs
8
128
ROPs
4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
8 MB
L2 Cache
16 KB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
115.2 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
1.836 GPixel/s
230.4 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
3.672 GTexel/s
29.49 TFLOPS
FP16 (half)
-
14.75 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
29.38 GFLOPS
3.686 TFLOPS
FP64 (double)
-
Board Design
500W
TDP
21W
900 W
Suggested PSU
200 W
No outputs
Outputs
1x DMS-59
8-pin EPS
Power Connectors
None
Graphics Processor
DG2-512
GPU Name
G86
-
-
-
Generation 12.7
Architecture
Tesla
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
6 nm
Process Size
80 nm
21.7 billion
Transistors
0.21 billion
406 mm²
Die Size
127 mm²
Graphics Features
12 Ultimate (12_2)
DirectX
11.1 (10_0)
4.6
OpenGL
3.3
3.0
OpenCL
1.1
1.3
Vulkan
N/A
-
CUDA
1.1
6.6
Shader Model
4.0
