NVS 310 vs GeForce 9650M GS

NVS 310

2015Core: 902 MHzBoost: 1033 MHz

GeForce 9650M GS

2012Core: 790 MHzBoost: 835 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

NVS 310

275

+1.9%

GeForce RTX 2060 with Max-Q Design

GeForce GTX 1070 Ti

GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU

GeForce 9650M GS

270

0.0%

GeForce RTX 2060 with Max-Q Design

GeForce GTX 1070 Ti

GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop 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 NVS 310 is positioned at rank 305 and the GeForce 9650M GS is on rank 680, so the NVS 310 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 NVS 310

#116

Radeon Pro SSG

MSRP: $6999|Avg: $1500

91%

#290

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

8539%

#305

NVS 310

MSRP: $159|Avg: $10

100%

#306

GRID M60-2Q

MSRP: $3000|Avg: $150

100%

#308

FirePro 3D V3750

MSRP: $199|Avg: $25

99%

#309

NVS 810

MSRP: $700|Avg: $80

98%

#310

GRID P40-2Q

MSRP: $5699|Avg: $340

97%

#311

Quadro 2000D

MSRP: $599|Avg: $40

95%

#312

FirePro 3D V8800

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $30

94%

#313

Quadro K5000

MSRP: $2499|Avg: $60

92%

#314

Quadro 2000

MSRP: $599|Avg: $25

91%

#315

FirePro S7150

MSRP: $2399|Avg: $459

91%

#317

FirePro W9000

MSRP: $3999|Avg: $150

89%

#318

GRID M60-4Q

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $120

88%

#319

FirePro V8800

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $100

88%

#320

Quadro K6000

MSRP: $5265|Avg: $300

88%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9650M GS

#669

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

7983%

#671

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

7237%

#672

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

7218%

#676

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

6563%

#677

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

6518%

#679

GeForce 8400 SE

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

100%

#680

GeForce 9650M GS

MSRP: $199|Avg: $20

100%

#681

GeForce 8400M GT

MSRP: $50|Avg: $30

99%

#682

Mobility Radeon HD 3410

MSRP: $49|Avg: $10

95%

#683

GeForce 9200M GS

MSRP: $100|Avg: $40

95%

#684

MOBILITY RADEON X700 XL

MSRP: $49|Avg: $10

90%

#685

GeForce 9300M GS

MSRP: $100|Avg: $10

87%

#686

Mobility Radeon HD 2400

MSRP: $79|Avg: $1

84%

#687

GeForce 6150 LE

MSRP: $30|Avg: $10

81%

#688

Mobility Radeon HD 3870 X2

MSRP: $449|Avg: $50

78%

#689

GeForce 9450

MSRP: $100|Avg: $25

77%

#690

GeForce 9800 GX2

MSRP: $599|Avg: $75

75%

#691

GeForce 7900 GS

MSRP: $259|Avg: $50

74%

#692

MOBILITY RADEON X600

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

74%

#693

Mobility Radeon X2300 HD

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

72%

#694

Mobility Radeon HD 4250

MSRP: $100|Avg: $15

72%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The NVS 310 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 9650M GS.

Insight	NVS 310	GeForce 9650M GS
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+1.9%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.9%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

The NVS 310 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the NVS 310 holds the technical lead. Priced at $10 (vs $20), it costs 50% less, resulting in a 103.7% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	NVS 310	GeForce 9650M GS
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+103.7%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($10)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($20)

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.

NVS 310 Benchmark Check

GeForce 9650M GS Benchmark Check

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of NVS 310 and GeForce 9650M GS

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.

GeForce 9650M GS

The GeForce 9650M GS is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 22 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 790 MHz to 835 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 270 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The NVS 310 scores 275 and the GeForce 9650M GS reaches 270 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The NVS 310 is built on Maxwell while the GeForce 9650M GS uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 512 (NVS 310) vs 768 (GeForce 9650M GS). Boost clocks: 1033 MHz vs 835 MHz.

Feature	NVS 310	GeForce 9650M GS
G3D Mark Score	275+2%	270
Architecture	Maxwell	Kepler
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	512 ×2	768+50%
Boost Clock	1033 MHz+24%	835 MHz

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	NVS 310	GeForce 9650M GS
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: 64-bit vs 128-bit.

Feature	NVS 310	GeForce 9650M GS
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (NVS 310) vs 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce 9650M GS). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

Feature	NVS 310	GeForce 9650M GS
DirectX	12 (11_0)+8%	11.1 (10_0)
OpenGL	4.6+39%	3.3
Max Displays	2	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: Fermi NVENC (NVS 310) vs No NVENC (G84) (GeForce 9650M GS). Decoder: VP4 vs PureVideo HD VP2. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (NVS 310) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,WMV9 (GeForce 9650M GS).

Feature	NVS 310	GeForce 9650M GS
Encoder	Fermi NVENC	No NVENC (G84)
Decoder	VP4	PureVideo HD VP2
Codecs	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,WMV9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The NVS 310 draws 68W versus the GeForce 9650M GS's 30W — a 77.6% difference. The GeForce 9650M GS is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (NVS 310) vs 350W (GeForce 9650M GS). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 85°C.

Feature	NVS 310	GeForce 9650M GS
TDP	68W	30W-56%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Legacy
Length	145mm	—
Height	69mm	—
Slots	1	0-100%
Temp (Load)	75°C-12%	85°C
Perf/Watt	4.0	9.0+125%

💰

Value Analysis

The NVS 310 launched at $159 MSRP and currently averages $10, while the GeForce 9650M GS launched at $199 and now averages $20. The NVS 310 costs 50% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 27.5 (NVS 310) vs 13.5 (GeForce 9650M GS) — the NVS 310 offers 103.7% better value. The NVS 310 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2012).