Intel
Intel Arc Pro B60 vs Quadro NVS 315
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
Quadro NVS 315
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Arc Pro B60 and Quadro NVS 315 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗Arc Pro B60 outperforms Quadro NVS 315 by ~6% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+6%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Partially verifiedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 16Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: Intel Arc Pro B60 (~6%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider Arc Pro B60
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0 / oneAPI · Intel XeSS
Reasons to consider Quadro NVS 315
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
Intel
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Memory capacity
5230
87100
10043
Graphics card ranking
Positions 19–24of 30
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Quadro NVS 315
59 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
52Better
30
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
44Better
28
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
41Better
26
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
87
100Better
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
54Better
51
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Architecture
Process nodeBetter
Release date
VRAMBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
TFLOPSBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Max monitors
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
Device class
Memory type
Shader units / cores
Clock speedBetter
Compute API—
Upscaling
Max resolution
HDMI
DisplayPort
USB Type-C
Length
Thickness
Power connector—
Transistor count
Die size
Base clock
Boost clock
Recommended PSU
Memory cache
Power consumption—
Launch price——
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares Arc Pro B60 and Quadro NVS 315 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
Arc Pro B60Quadro NVS 315
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
—
154 FPS
1080p Ultra
—
108 FPS
1440p Ultra
—
58 FPS
4K Ultra
—
21 FPS
Counter-Strike 2Arc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 315154 FPSArc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 315108 FPSArc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 31558 FPSArc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 31521 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077Arc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 31599 FPSArc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 31585 FPSArc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 31542 FPSArc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 31514 FPS
Forza Horizon 5Arc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 315125 FPSArc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 31581 FPSArc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 31552 FPSArc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 31531 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyArc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 31581 FPSArc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 31568 FPSArc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 31538 FPSArc Pro B60—Quadro NVS 31514 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100523054%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100603067%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100653463%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 1001004380%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1008710014%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100743669%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100713568%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100653463%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100783771%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100663464%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectXDirectX 12 Ultimate12.0
Vulkan1.31.2
OpenGLUp to 4.64.6
UpscalingIntel XeSSNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0 / oneAPI—
Architecture and release
ArchitectureXe2Not publicly specified
Process nodeTSMC N5Better40 nm
Release dateQ2'252013
Device classProfProf
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor countNot publicly specifiedNot publicly specified
Die sizeNot publicly specifiedNot publicly specified
Shader units / cores20 Xe coresNot publicly specified
Base clockNot publicly specified523 MHz
Boost clockNot publicly specified523 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCI Express 5.0 x8PCIe 2x16
LengthVaries by board manufacturerVaries by board
ThicknessVaries by board manufacturerVaries by board
Recommended PSUNot publicly specifiedVaries by board
Power connectorVaries by board manufacturer—
Display outputs and limits
HDMIHDMI 2.1; board dependentBoard dependent
DisplayPortDisplayPort 2.1; board dependentBoard dependent
USB Type-CVaries by board manufacturerNo
Max monitors4Varies by board
Max resolution7680 x 4320@120HzVaries by board
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM24 GB GDDR6Better1 GB DDR3
Memory typeGDDR6DDR3
Memory bus192 bitBetter64 bit
TFLOPS12.28Better0.026
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 16
- Specifications
- 23 / 65
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (2)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (1)
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: Arc Pro B60 or Quadro NVS 315?+
Arc Pro B60 has the higher overall gaming score, while Quadro NVS 315 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
Quadro NVS 315 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
Quadro NVS 315 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
Arc Pro B60 offers more overall performance, while Arc Pro B60 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
Quadro NVS 315 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
Quadro NVS 315 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
Arc Pro B60 leads in combined 1440p performance. Arc Pro B60 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
Arc Pro B60 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
Quadro NVS 315 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
Quadro NVS 315 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to Arc Pro B60 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.