GeForce 410M vs NVS 310
GeForce 410M
Popular choices:
NVS 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 410M is positioned at rank 56 and the NVS 310 is on rank 305, so the GeForce 410M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 410M
Performance Per Dollar NVS 310
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The NVS 310 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.5% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 410M.
| Insight | GeForce 410M | NVS 310 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| 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 NVS 310 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 410M and NVS 310
GeForce 410M
The GeForce 410M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1072 MHz to 1176 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 271 points.
NVS 310
The NVS 310 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 4 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 902 MHz to 1033 MHz. It has 512 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 68W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 275 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 410M scores 271 and the NVS 310 reaches 275 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 410M is built on Maxwell while the NVS 310 uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 410M) vs 512 (NVS 310). Raw compute: 0.9032 TFLOPS (GeForce 410M) vs 1.058 TFLOPS ×2 (NVS 310). Boost clocks: 1176 MHz vs 1033 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce 410M | NVS 310 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 271 | 275+1% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 512 ×2+33% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.9032 TFLOPS | 1.058 TFLOPS ×2+17% |
| Boost Clock | 1176 MHz+14% | 1033 MHz |
| ROPs | 8 | 16 ×2+100% |
| TMUs | 24 | 32 ×2+33% |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 256 KB+33% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 410M | NVS 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)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce 410M | NVS 310 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.0 (GeForce 410M) vs 12 (11_0) (NVS 310). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce 410M | NVS 310 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.0 | 12 (11_0)+9% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce 410M) vs Fermi NVENC (NVS 310). Decoder: PureVideo VP4 vs VP4. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 (GeForce 410M) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (NVS 310).
| Feature | GeForce 410M | NVS 310 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | Fermi NVENC |
| Decoder | PureVideo VP4 | VP4 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 410M draws 33W versus the NVS 310's 68W — a 69.3% difference. The GeForce 410M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 410M) vs 350W (NVS 310). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce 410M | NVS 310 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 33W-51% | 68W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 145mm |
| Height | 0mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 75°C-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 8.2+105% | 4.0 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 410M and NVS 310
