GeForce 310M vs GeForce G210M
GeForce 310M
Popular choices:
GeForce G210M
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 310M is positioned at rank 613 and the GeForce G210M is on rank 436, so the GeForce G210M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 310M
Performance Per Dollar GeForce G210M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce G210M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.6% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 310M.
| Insight | GeForce 310M | GeForce G210M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce G210M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 310M and GeForce G210M
GeForce 310M
The GeForce 310M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 549 MHz to 549 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 127 points.
GeForce G210M
The GeForce G210M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 25 2016. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 965 MHz to 993 MHz. It has 256 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 16W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 129 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 310M scores 127 and the GeForce G210M reaches 129 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 310M is built on Maxwell while the GeForce G210M uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 310M) vs 256 (GeForce G210M). Raw compute: 0.4216 TFLOPS (GeForce 310M) vs 0.5084 TFLOPS (GeForce G210M). Boost clocks: 549 MHz vs 993 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce 310M | GeForce G210M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 127 | 129+2% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384+50% | 256 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.4216 TFLOPS | 0.5084 TFLOPS+21% |
| Boost Clock | 549 MHz | 993 MHz+81% |
| ROPs | 8 | 8 |
| TMUs | 24 | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB+50% | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 310M | GeForce G210M |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | GeForce 310M | GeForce G210M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (GeForce 310M) vs 10.1 (GeForce G210M). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 1.
| Feature | GeForce 310M | GeForce G210M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 10.1 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 2+100% | 1 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce 310M) vs No (GeForce G210M). Decoder: PureVideo VP4 vs PureVideo HD VP4. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 (GeForce 310M) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 (GeForce G210M).
| Feature | GeForce 310M | GeForce G210M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | No |
| Decoder | PureVideo VP4 | PureVideo HD VP4 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 310M draws 33W versus the GeForce G210M's 16W — a 69.4% difference. The GeForce G210M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 310M) vs 350W (GeForce G210M). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | GeForce 310M | GeForce G210M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 33W | 16W-52% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | — | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 70°C-13% |
| Perf/Watt | 3.8 | 8.1+113% |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 310M and GeForce G210M
