GeForce 310M vs GeForce RTX 4070
GeForce 310M
Popular choices:
GeForce RTX 4070
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. The GeForce 310M is positioned at rank #613 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 310M
Performance Per Dollar GeForce RTX 4070
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 4070 is significantly newer (2023 vs 2015). The GeForce RTX 4070 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 310M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce RTX 4070 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 21096.1% higher G3D Mark score and 2300% more VRAM (12 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 310M.
| Insight | GeForce 310M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-21096.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+21096.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🏆Elite Architecture (Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) / 5nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (12 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | Standard Size (304mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce RTX 4070 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 RTX 4070
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 RTX 4070
The GeForce RTX 4070 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 12 2023. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 1920 MHz to 2475 MHz. It has 5888 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 26,919 points. Launch price was $599.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce 310M scores 127 versus the GeForce RTX 4070's 26,919 — the GeForce RTX 4070 leads by 21096.1%. The GeForce 310M is built on Maxwell while the GeForce RTX 4070 uses Ada Lovelace, both on 28 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 310M) vs 5,888 (GeForce RTX 4070). Raw compute: 0.4216 TFLOPS (GeForce 310M) vs 29.15 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4070). Boost clocks: 549 MHz vs 2475 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce 310M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 127 | 26,919+21096% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Ada Lovelace |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 5888+1433% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.4216 TFLOPS | 29.15 TFLOPS+6814% |
| Boost Clock | 549 MHz | 2475 MHz+351% |
| ROPs | 8 | 64+700% |
| TMUs | 24 | 184+667% |
| L1 Cache | 0.19 MB | 5.8 MB+2953% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 36 MB+3500% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the GeForce RTX 4070 is support for DLSS 3 Frame Gen. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The GeForce 310M lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.
| Feature | GeForce 310M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 3.5 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | DLSS 3.0 (Native) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | Yes (DLSS 3.5) |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce 310M comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 4070 has 12 GB. The GeForce RTX 4070 offers 2300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 310M) vs 36 MB (GeForce RTX 4070) — the GeForce RTX 4070 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 310M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 12 GB+2300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6X |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | 504 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 192-bit+50% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 36 MB+3500% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (GeForce 310M) vs 12.2 (GeForce RTX 4070). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce 310M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 12.2+21% |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6+39% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce 310M) vs 8th Gen NVENC (2x) (GeForce RTX 4070). Decoder: PureVideo VP4 vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 (GeForce 310M) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (GeForce RTX 4070).
| Feature | GeForce 310M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | 8th Gen NVENC (2x) |
| Decoder | PureVideo VP4 | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 310M draws 33W versus the GeForce RTX 4070's 200W — a 143.3% difference. The GeForce 310M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 310M) vs 650W (GeForce RTX 4070). Power connectors: Legacy vs 8-pin. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce 310M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 33W-84% | 200W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-46% | 650W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | 8-pin |
| Length | — | 304mm |
| Height | — | 137mm |
| Slots | 1-67% | 3 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 3.8 | 134.6+3442% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 4070 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2015).
| Feature | GeForce 310M | GeForce RTX 4070 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $599 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $550 |
| Codename | GM108 | AD104 |
| Release | March 13 2015 | April 12 2023 |
| Ranking | #880 | #32 |
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 RTX 4070
