NVIDIA Releases GeForce GT 520

by Ryan Smith on 4/12/2011 8:00 PM EST


Back to Article

  • Bremen7000 - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    It's such a small part of the overall review, but I just wanted to reiterate how extremely useful the Video Card MSRPs chart is on the front page of each video card review you guys have been doing lately. I keep coming back to that chart. Reply
  • SonicIce - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    dat chart Reply
  • soydeedo - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    I agree completely. Reply
  • ImSpartacus - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    Yes, a simple chart, but it's so effective. If you lose track of GPU releases for a few months, such a chart would be absolutely essential.

    Keep it updated Ryan, we like it.
  • Ryan Smith - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    Thanks for the feedback guys. It's very useful since it's a clear sign to continue producing that chart. Reply
  • marc1000 - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    yes, it is absolutely essential. very small and very needed. Reply
  • velanapontinha - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    Hi, Ryan.

    Will there be a review of this card anytime soon? Reviews for mid a low range cards are much more usefull for IT professionals than those of uber high end cards.


  • therealnickdanger - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    ... and HTPC users! Reply
  • MrSpadge - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    Performance absolutely s*cks (just look at the specs, it's even going to be slower than the GT220, which had been slow back then). Power consumption is worse than IGPs, as always. Any other possible advantage of this over say a Sandy Bridge IGP would be drivers - and these are similar for all cards.
    The situation is not so clear for a HTPC, though.

  • Ryan Smith - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    We don't have one immediately planned, but it shouldn't be a problem getting a 520 and testing it.

    Though I'm not sure what as an IT professional you're looking for in such a card.
  • HangFire - Thursday, April 14, 2011 - link

    No, it doesn't surprise me that AnandTech doesn't understand what It professionals need.

    Engineers often have modest but definite needs for OpenGL or 3D compliance, as do their managers, often just to use product viewers to see the design. Huge gaming cards or high-end CAD qualified cards are mostly unnecessary, except maybe for one or two designer's workstations, but simply to view their work on standard IT system, a 3D qualified card is needed- and that doesn't mean Intel built-in graphics.


    "OpenGL Graphics Card is required on the Graphics Server for thumbnail generation and thin/java client support."


    "To use Mathematica 8's built-in GPU computing capabilities, you'll need a graphics card that supports OpenCL or CUDA, such as many cards from NVIDIA, AMD, and others."


    "Video driver with openGL acceleration, highly recommended"
  • synaesthetic - Thursday, April 14, 2011 - link

    Engineers != IT professionals.

    Bunch of guys networking machines together for bean counters who run Excel all day don't need anything beyond an IGP.
  • HangFire - Thursday, April 14, 2011 - link

    Wow, that's a flash of insight.

    In the many places I have worked, our IT professionals provide and service the computer systems of engineers, managers, and buyers, all of whom may use software that requires some basic 3D capabilities.
  • dendysutrisna - Wednesday, August 17, 2011 - link

    I do not agree to say that this Nvidia GeForce GT 520M had a very bad performance. At least with the price range $55 - $60 you can get the visual results that very, very adequate. Other hand if you are an enthusiastic gamer ... you should look for graphics cards with price range of $250 upwards. By the way is true at the top I do not find review of this GT 520M?? But I have tried one NoteBook products that harness the power of this graphics card, look at its review at http://www.bestdealscomputers.net/netbooks/asus-u3... There are also some games (high demanding) that can be played with this graphics card, yeah there is some resolution settings and its frames / second. But simply, that much okay with a price range you can reasonably do many things. Reply
  • dgingeri - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    so, in essence, we're getting half the ROPs and half the memory bandwidth, but a slight bump in speed, for the same price? sounds like screwing over their customers to me. Reply
  • andyfoo - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    From the look of it, it looks like this might be a low-profile GPU, anyone able to confirm? My friend would like to get a newer card (he's running an ATI 5570) but we're not sure what the options are for newer cards. Reply
  • MrSpadge - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    It's certainly much slower than your friends HD5570 (400 stream processors). Generally there are not many low profile cards around. I don't know of any which would be faster than the HD5570.
    And generally it's not a good idea to want a "new" card. You should want a better one ;) Given that the HD5570 is already 40 nm and the best current ones are also 40 nm, you can't expect much of an improvement given the same style of card. You'd have to move up to larger and more power hungry cards to get something faster.

  • marc1000 - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    I believe the 5570 is really the fastest you can go with low-profile / no external power.

    your friend wants to wait for 28nm, in reality.
  • Guspaz - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    The real question is, how does it compare to SNB's onboard graphics? Reply
  • marc1000 - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    roughly the double? it is aprox. what we have with the 6450. Reply
  • ultimatebob - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    They come in handy if you want to add an extra monitor to your system, or your on-board graphics chipset isn't compatible with the OS that you're using.

    I found that cards like these come in handy with certain older Linux distributions, where the XOrg drivers for certain Intel integrated video chipsets really suck.
  • dozierc - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    So which is faster? I see the 520 does have the 430(Fermi) beat but look at the other specs it's half. I just today got the 430 for my low profile computer then saw this article. ;-(
    Technology is going to make me broke.
  • Marlin1975 - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    No, the 430 beats this. The 520 is a lot slower. Reply
  • wifiwolf - Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - link

    But on the other hand this newer card would have the improvements nvidia did for video playback and bitstreaming - i think it's the only interesting feature for this card. Reply
  • Lolimaster - Sunday, April 17, 2011 - link

    The card is cr@p anyway, want a good HTPC, the real deal? Go for the HD6450.

    Want something to actually play, HD5570 or the soon the launched HD6570. Nvidia is in limbo for the mid to low end market.

    "three gens after" (rebrands) at this garbaga of GT520 is slower than a GT220 (wich was slow at it's time an near the same price of a HD4650 who destroyed it. See, the same pattern, Nvidia lost it.
  • HangFire - Thursday, April 14, 2011 - link

    This product announcement is missing OpenGL version and CUDA support information, not just for Linux but even for Windows. Reply
  • Remingtonh - Saturday, April 23, 2011 - link

    Awesome Chart, Thanks... Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now