Notebookcheck Logo

NVIDIA Quadro NVS 110M vs ATI Radeon Xpress X1270

NVIDIA Quadro NVS 110M

► remove from comparison NVIDIA Quadro NVS 110M

It is based on the GeForce Go 7300 with professional certified graphics drivers for applications like CAD, Rendering, 3D modelling, etc. The usability for games is limited. It is the smaller version of the NVIDIA Quadro NVS 120M for notebooks.

ATI Radeon Xpress X1270

► remove from comparison

The Radeon Xpress X1270 (RS690M) is an onboard graphics card for notebooks / laptops and according to AMD optimized for a good price/value. It is based on a X700 design but with less pixel- and vertex-pipelines.

The different RS600 and RS690 (Xpress X1200, X1250, and X1270) offer the same graphics core, but may have a different core clock. Still the performance should be compareable.

ATI Radeon Xpress X1270 is hardly apt for gamers. Only old games like Quake 3 Arena can be played in 1024x768 with high/medium details fluently. Even Warcraft 3 runs fluently with minimum details. Current, damanding games like FEAR, Doom3 and Quake 4 can hardly be played (e.g. 2 frames per second in battle scenes in Quake 4). Some strategy games like Age of Empires 3 can only be played with minimal details.

The graphic chip supports Windows Vista Aero surface and all 3D effects run fluently.

Technically the chip has 4 pixel-pipelines and either a texture unit (with 2 vertex shaders) or no vertex shaders (each source tells a different story).

The current consumption of the desktop version lies around 13.8 Watt (TDP) and 8 Watt average. The mobile versions could be more economic as they offer Powerplay support.

show full text
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 110MATI Radeon Xpress X1270
Radeon Xpress X1200 Series
Quadro NVS 5100M compare 48 @ 0.55 GHz128 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro NVS 320M compare 32 @ 0.58 GHz128 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro NVS 300M compare 8/5 cores @ 0.45 GHz128 Bit @ 500 MHz
Quadro NVS 140M compare 16 @ 0.4 GHz64 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro NVS 160M compare 8 @ 0.58 GHz64 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro NVS 150M compare 8 @ 0.53 GHz64 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro NVS 135M compare 16 @ 0.4 GHz64 Bit @ 600 MHz
Quadro NVS 130M compare 8 64 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro NVS 120M compare 4/3 cores @ 0.45 GHz64 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro NVS 110M 4/3 cores @ 0.3 GHz64 Bit @ 600 MHz
Radeon Xpress X1270 4/0 cores @ 0.4 GHz
Radeon Xpress X1250 compare 4/0 cores @ 0.35 GHz
Radeon Xpress X1200 compare 4/0 cores @ 0.35 GHz
CodenameG72MM690T
Pipelines4 / 3 Pixel- / Vertexshader4 / 0 Pixel- / Vertexshader
Core Speed300 MHz400 MHz
Memory Speed600 MHz
Memory Bus Width64 Bit
Memory TypeDDR-3
Max. Amount of Memory64 MB128 MB
Shared Memorynoyes
APIDirectX 9c, Shader 3.0DirectX 9, Shader 2.0
Power Consumption10 Watt
Transistors112 Million
technology90 nm80 nm
FeaturesPureVideo, UltraShadow II, Intellisample 4.0, CineFX 4.0, PowerMizer 6.0, High Dynamic-Range (HDR) LighningPowerPlay 7.0, 80 or 90nm process, HDMI support!
Date of Announcement01.06.2006 01.02.2007
Information90nm, 112 Mio Transistoren, PCI-E
Link to Manufacturer Pagewww.nvidia.comwww.amd.com

Benchmarks

3DMark 2001SE - 3DMark 2001 - Standard
11000 Points (11%)
min: 3166     avg: 4859     median: 5217 (5%)     max: 5860 Points
3DMark 03 - 3DMark 03 - Standard
min: 3300     avg: 3686     median: 3685.5 (2%)     max: 4071 Points
min: 1200     avg: 1673     median: 1720 (1%)     max: 1970 Points
3DMark 05 - 3DMark 05 - Standard
1500 Points (2%)
min: 773     avg: 983     median: 990 (1%)     max: 1190 Points
3DMark 06 3DMark 06 - Score Unknown Settings + NVIDIA Quadro NVS 110M
3DMark 06
590 Points (1%)
3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 + NVIDIA Quadro NVS 110M
3DMark 06
600 Points (1%)
3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 + ATI Radeon Xpress X1270
min: 320     avg: 327.5     median: 327.5 (0%)     max: 335 Points
3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x800 + ATI Radeon Xpress X1270
3DMark 06
min: 337     avg: 362.5     median: 369.5 (0%)     max: 374 Points
3DMark 06 - Standard 1024x768 + ATI Radeon Xpress X1270
3DMark 06
291 Points (0%)
Windows Vista Experience Index - Windows Vista Leistungsindex - Grafik (Spiele)
3.1 Points (46%)
Windows Vista Experience Index - Windows Vista Leistungsindex - Grafik
3.2 Points (47%)
Cinebench R10 Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit) + ATI Radeon Xpress X1270
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit)
min: 540     avg: 618     median: 559 (0%)     max: 755 Points

Average Benchmarks NVIDIA Quadro NVS 110M → 100% n=4

Average Benchmarks ATI Radeon Xpress X1270 → 54% n=4

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Game Benchmarks

The following benchmarks stem from our benchmarks of review laptops. The performance depends on the used graphics memory, clock rate, processor, system settings, drivers, and operating systems. So the results don't have to be representative for all laptops with this GPU. For detailed information on the benchmark results, click on the fps number.

F.E.A.R.

F.E.A.R.

2005
low 640x480
Radeon Xpress X1270:
67 76 ~ 72 fps
med. 800x600
Radeon Xpress X1270:
15 15 ~ 15 fps
high 1024x768
Radeon Xpress X1270:
2 2 ~ 2 fps
Quake 3 Arena - Timedemo

Quake 3 Arena - Timedemo

1999
high 1024x768
Radeon Xpress X1270:
88 89.8 107 ~ 95 fps
ATI Radeon Xpress X1270lowmed.highultraQHD4K
F.E.A.R.72152
Quake 3 Arena - Timedemo95
< 30 fps
< 60 fps
< 120 fps
≥ 120 fps

1
1


1

1









For more games that might be playable and a list of all games and graphics cards visit our Gaming List

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2024, 2023
v1.26
log 28. 12:07:14

#0 checking url part for id 39 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 111 +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Sun, 28 Apr 2024 05:41:30 +0200 +0.001s ... 0.001s

#4 composed specs +0.093s ... 0.094s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.094s

#6 start showIntegratedCPUs +0s ... 0.094s

#7 getting avg benchmarks for device 39 +0.024s ... 0.118s

#8 got single benchmarks 39 +0.009s ... 0.127s

#9 getting avg benchmarks for device 111 +0.002s ... 0.129s

#10 got single benchmarks 111 +0.028s ... 0.157s

#11 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.157s

#12 min, max, avg, median took s +0.217s ... 0.373s

#13 before gaming benchmark output +0s ... 0.373s

#14 Got 9 rows for game benchmarks. +0.004s ... 0.377s

#15 composed SQL query for gamebenchmarks +0s ... 0.377s

#16 got data and put it in $dataArray +0.001s ... 0.378s

#17 benchmarks composed for output. +0.004s ... 0.382s

#18 calculated avg scores. +0s ... 0.382s

#19 return log +0.056s ... 0.439s

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Benchmarks / Tech > Graphics Card Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2023-07- 1)