GeForce 210 vs GeForce 310
GeForce 210
Popular choices:
GeForce 310
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce 210 is positioned at rank 599 and the GeForce 310 is on rank 577, so the GeForce 310 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 210
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 310
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 210 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce 210 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 310 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 310 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.6% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce 210 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce 210 | GeForce 310 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.6%) |
| Longevity | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 310 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $5 (vs $5), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 3.6% better value per dollar than the GeForce 210.
| Insight | GeForce 210 | GeForce 310 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+3.6%) |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 210 and GeForce 310
GeForce 210
The GeForce 210 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 20 2019. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 937 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 10W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 138 points.
GeForce 310
The GeForce 310 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 928 MHz to 941 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 143 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 210 scores 138 and the GeForce 310 reaches 143 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 210 is built on Pascal while the GeForce 310 uses Maxwell, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 210) vs 384 (GeForce 310). Raw compute: 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce 210) vs 0.7227 TFLOPS (GeForce 310). Boost clocks: 1038 MHz vs 941 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce 210 | GeForce 310 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 138 | 143+4% |
| Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7972 TFLOPS+10% | 0.7227 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1038 MHz+10% | 941 MHz |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 24 | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 144 KB | 192 KB+33% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 210 | GeForce 310 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce 210 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce 310 has 512 MB. The GeForce 210 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (GeForce 210) vs 1 MB (GeForce 310) — the GeForce 310 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 210 | GeForce 310 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB+100% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (GeForce 210) vs 10.1 (GeForce 310). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce 210 | GeForce 310 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 10.1 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce 210) vs None (GeForce 310). Decoder: PureVideo VP4 vs PureVideo VP4. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 (GeForce 210) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 (GeForce 310).
| Feature | GeForce 210 | GeForce 310 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo VP4 | PureVideo VP4 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 210 draws 10W versus the GeForce 310's 33W — a 107% difference. The GeForce 210 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 210) vs 350W (GeForce 310). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Card length: 168mm vs 168mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce 210 | GeForce 310 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 10W-70% | 33W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | 168mm | 168mm |
| Height | 69mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C-6% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 13.8+221% | 4.3 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 210 launched at $50 MSRP and currently averages $5, while the GeForce 310 launched at $45 and now averages $5. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 27.6 (GeForce 210) vs 28.6 (GeForce 310) — the GeForce 310 offers 3.6% better value. The GeForce 210 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).
| Feature | GeForce 210 | GeForce 310 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $50 | $45-10% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $5 | $5 |
| Performance per Dollar | 27.6 | 28.6+4% |
| Codename | GP108B | GM108 |
| Release | February 20 2019 | March 13 2015 |
| Ranking | #643 | #810 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 210 and GeForce 310
