CPU
GPU
GeForce G 103M
Popular choices:
GeForce Go 7300
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 G 103M is positioned at rank 252 and the GeForce Go 7300 is on rank 121, so the GeForce Go 7300 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce G 103M
Performance Per Dollar GeForce Go 7300
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce G 103M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 21.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce Go 7300.
| Insight | GeForce G 103M | GeForce Go 7300 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+21.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-21.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce G 103M 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce G 103M and GeForce Go 7300
GeForce G 103M
The GeForce G 103M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1228 MHz to 1468 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 63 points. Launch price was $79.
GeForce Go 7300
The GeForce Go 7300 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 29 2014. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 993 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 64W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 52 points. Launch price was $89.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce G 103M scores 63 versus the GeForce Go 7300's 52 — the GeForce G 103M leads by 21.2%. The GeForce G 103M is built on Pascal while the GeForce Go 7300 uses Kepler, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce G 103M) vs 384 (GeForce Go 7300). Raw compute: 1.127 TFLOPS (GeForce G 103M) vs 0.7626 TFLOPS (GeForce Go 7300).
| Feature | GeForce G 103M | GeForce Go 7300 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 63+21% | 52 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Kepler |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.127 TFLOPS+48% | 0.7626 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 24 | 32+33% |
| L1 Cache | 144 KB+350% | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce G 103M | GeForce Go 7300 |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 512 KB (GeForce G 103M) vs 256 KB (GeForce Go 7300) — the GeForce G 103M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce G 103M | GeForce Go 7300 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.0 (GeForce G 103M) vs 9.0c (GeForce Go 7300). Vulkan: None vs None. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 2.1. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce G 103M | GeForce Go 7300 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.0+11% | 9.0c |
| Vulkan | None | None |
| OpenGL | 3.3+57% | 2.1 |
| Max Displays | 1 | 2+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No (GeForce G 103M) vs No (GeForce Go 7300). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP3 vs PureVideo. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (GeForce G 103M) vs MPEG-2,WMV9,H.264 (GeForce Go 7300).
| Feature | GeForce G 103M | GeForce Go 7300 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No | No |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP3 | PureVideo |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 | MPEG-2,WMV9,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce G 103M draws 30W versus the GeForce Go 7300's 64W — a 72.3% difference. The GeForce G 103M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce G 103M) vs 350W (GeForce Go 7300). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce G 103M | GeForce Go 7300 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W-53% | 64W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | 0mm | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 2.1+163% | 0.8 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce G 103M and GeForce Go 7300
