CPU
GPU
GeForce 9500M G
Popular choices:
GeForce 310M
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 9500M G is positioned at rank 519 and the GeForce 310M is on rank 613, so the GeForce 9500M G offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9500M G
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 310M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 310M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 4.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 9500M G.
| Insight | GeForce 9500M G | GeForce 310M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-4.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+4.1%) |
| 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 | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 9500M G and GeForce 310M
GeForce 9500M G
The GeForce 9500M G is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 27 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 928 MHz to 1020 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 122 points.
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.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 9500M G scores 122 and the GeForce 310M reaches 127 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 9500M G is built on Maxwell while the GeForce 310M uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 640 (GeForce 9500M G) vs 384 (GeForce 310M). Raw compute: 1.306 TFLOPS (GeForce 9500M G) vs 0.4216 TFLOPS (GeForce 310M). Boost clocks: 1020 MHz vs 549 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce 9500M G | GeForce 310M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 122 | 127+4% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 640+67% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.306 TFLOPS+210% | 0.4216 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1020 MHz+86% | 549 MHz |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 40+67% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB+67% | 192 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 9500M G | GeForce 310M |
|---|---|---|
| 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. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GeForce 9500M G) vs 1 MB (GeForce 310M) — the GeForce 9500M G has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 9500M G | GeForce 310M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.0 (GeForce 9500M G) vs 10.1 (GeForce 310M). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce 9500M G | GeForce 310M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.0 | 10.1 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 1 | 2+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No (GeForce 9500M G) vs None (GeForce 310M). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP3 vs PureVideo VP4. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (GeForce 9500M G) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 (GeForce 310M).
| Feature | GeForce 9500M G | GeForce 310M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP3 | PureVideo VP4 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 9500M G draws 75W versus the GeForce 310M's 33W — a 77.8% difference. The GeForce 310M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 9500M G) vs 350W (GeForce 310M). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce 9500M G | GeForce 310M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 33W-56% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | 0mm | — |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-13% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 1.6 | 3.8+137% |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 9500M G and GeForce 310M
