Well, that’s interesting too. I wonder how they got the performance out of it? (Ok, yeah, the details of that are above my pay grade!)
I can’t blame the seller, no one not truly “in” to it would know about a spec sheet having lived on incorrectly — and I really wonder why it would not get corrected?
Geez, where are the Tylenol...
Any guess as to whether that incorrect spec was THIS card?
I’m not sure what you’re asking here.
There were no NVS 510 video cards with GDDR3, only DDR3. Get the performance out of it? These were workstation cards, designed to push to multiple monitors up to 2560x1440 at up to 144Hz. Most common use was 1920x1080 at 144Hz. DisplayPort 1.2.
If someone somehow repopulated the board with GDDR3, it wouldn’t make any difference, as the clock speeds on the board in 128 lanes wouldn’t transfer the data any faster.
Modern use of these outdated GPUs are for use as home media centers. In ‘gaming’ applications, you’re talking about a card that benchmarks in the 3-4 frames per second category. It’s a GT 640 that’s been crippled by having half of the shaders disabled. You can run up to 8 monitors with text, 4 monitors with (mostly) static displays, 2 monitors with video feed up to Blu-ray spec, and I’ve heard, but personally never seen one drive a 4k monitor at 3840x2160 60Hz.
So suitability entirely depends on what you’re using them for. If you’re driving 4 menu boards at a restaurant, great choice. One 2k home HTPC for mostly driving streaming services? Again, great choice. 4k video, not a good choice.