GeForce 310M vs Radeon HD 4250

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 Radeon HD 4250 is on rank 299, so the Radeon HD 4250 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce 310M

#603

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

4274%

#605

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

3875%

#606

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

3865%

#610

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

3514%

#611

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

3490%

#613

GeForce 310M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#614

GeForce 205

MSRP: $50|Avg: $15

99%

#615

GeForce 9600 GSO

MSRP: $129|Avg: $25

98%

#616

GeForce 9800 GTX/9800 GTX+

MSRP: $229|Avg: $40

98%

#617

GeForce 9400

MSRP: $59|Avg: $15

98%

#618

GeForce 7350 LE

MSRP: $30|Avg: $10

97%

#620

Mobility Radeon HD 3850

MSRP: $150|Avg: $15

96%

#621

Mobility Radeon HD 4870

MSRP: $299|Avg: $20

95%

#622

GeForce 9800M GT

MSRP: $160|Avg: $5

94%

#623

Radeon HD 7600G + HD 7400M Dual

MSRP: $140|Avg: $35

93%

#624

Radeon HD 8550G + 8670M Dual

MSRP: $250|Avg: $40

91%

#625

GeForce 8300 GS

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

91%

#626

Mobility Radeon HD 3400 Serisi

MSRP: $49|Avg: $10

89%

#627

Radeon HD 8570D + HD 8470 Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $50

89%

#628

GeForce 9500M GS

MSRP: $60|Avg: $15

87%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 4250

#1

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

2949%

#2

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

2833%

#3

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

2800%

#4

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

2795%

#5

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

2789%

#6

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

2774%

#7

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

2739%

#8

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

2728%

#9

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

2703%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

2696%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

2663%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

2658%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

2610%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

2608%

#284

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

3252%

#299

Radeon HD 4250

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

100%

#300

Radeon HD 6310

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

99%

#301

GeForce GTX 295

MSRP: $499|Avg: $50

98%

#302

Radeon HD 4870 X2

MSRP: $550|Avg: $550

97%

#303

Radeon HD 3850 X2

MSRP: $349|Avg: $349

96%

#305

Radeon HD 4290

MSRP: $60|Avg: $10

96%

#306

Radeon HD 5450

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

92%

#308

Radeon HD 3850

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

91%

#309

Radeon HD 4200

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

91%

#310

Radeon HD 4270

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

89%

#312

Radeon E6460

MSRP: $150|Avg: $40

88%

#313

Radeon HD 6290

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

85%

#314

GeForce GTX 280

MSRP: $649|Avg: $649

80%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce 310M is significantly newer (2015 vs 2008). The GeForce 310M likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon HD 4250 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce 310M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD 4250.

Insight	GeForce 310M	Radeon HD 4250
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+3.3%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.3%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce 310M 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.

GeForce 310M Benchmark Check

Radeon HD 4250 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 310M and Radeon HD 4250

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.

Radeon HD 4250

The Radeon HD 4250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 25 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 110W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 123 points. Launch price was $199.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce 310M scores 127 and the Radeon HD 4250 reaches 123 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 310M is built on Maxwell while the Radeon HD 4250 uses TeraScale, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 310M) vs 800 (Radeon HD 4250). Raw compute: 0.4216 TFLOPS (GeForce 310M) vs 1 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 4250).

Feature	GeForce 310M	Radeon HD 4250
G3D Mark Score	127+3%	123
Architecture	Maxwell	TeraScale
Process Node	28 nm	55 nm
Shading Units	384	800+108%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.4216 TFLOPS	1 TFLOPS+137%
ROPs	8	16+100%
TMUs	24	40+67%
L1 Cache	192 KB+20%	160 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce 310M	Radeon HD 4250
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 310M) vs 0.25 MB (Radeon HD 4250) — the GeForce 310M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce 310M	Radeon HD 4250
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 10.1 (GeForce 310M) vs 10.1 (Radeon HD 4250). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce 310M	Radeon HD 4250
DirectX	10.1	10.1
Max Displays	2	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: None (GeForce 310M) vs UVD 2 (Radeon HD 4250). Decoder: PureVideo VP4 vs UVD 2.

Feature	GeForce 310M	Radeon HD 4250
Encoder	None	UVD 2
Decoder	PureVideo VP4	UVD 2
Codecs	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2	—

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce 310M draws 33W versus the Radeon HD 4250's 110W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce 310M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 310M) vs 350W (Radeon HD 4250). Power connectors: Legacy vs 1x 6-pin.