NVS 310 vs GeForce RTX 4060
NVS 310
Popular choices:
GeForce RTX 4060
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. The NVS 310 is positioned at rank #305 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar NVS 310
Performance Per Dollar GeForce RTX 4060
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 4060 is significantly newer (2023 vs 2015). The GeForce RTX 4060 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The NVS 310 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce RTX 4060 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 7008.4% higher G3D Mark score and 1500% more VRAM (8 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the NVS 310.
| Insight | NVS 310 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-7008.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+7008.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🏆Elite Architecture (Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) / 5nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce RTX 4060 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $299 (vs $10), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 137.7% better value per dollar than the NVS 310.
| Insight | NVS 310 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+137.7%) |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($10) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($299) |
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 NVS 310 and GeForce RTX 4060
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 RTX 4060
The GeForce RTX 4060 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 18 2023. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 1830 MHz to 2460 MHz. It has 3072 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 115W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 24 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 19,548 points. Launch price was $299.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the NVS 310 scores 275 versus the GeForce RTX 4060's 19,548 — the GeForce RTX 4060 leads by 7008.4%. The NVS 310 is built on Maxwell while the GeForce RTX 4060 uses Ada Lovelace, both on 28 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 512 (NVS 310) vs 3,072 (GeForce RTX 4060). Raw compute: 1.058 TFLOPS ×2 (NVS 310) vs 15.11 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4060). Boost clocks: 1033 MHz vs 2460 MHz.
| Feature | NVS 310 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 275 | 19,548+7008% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Ada Lovelace |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 512 ×2 | 3072+500% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.058 TFLOPS ×2 | 15.11 TFLOPS+1328% |
| Boost Clock | 1033 MHz | 2460 MHz+138% |
| ROPs | 16 ×2 | 48+200% |
| TMUs | 32 ×2 | 96+200% |
| L1 Cache | 0.25 MB | 3 MB+1100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 24 MB+2300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the GeForce RTX 4060 is support for DLSS 3 Frame Gen. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The NVS 310 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.
| Feature | NVS 310 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 3.5 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | DLSS 3.0 (Native) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | Yes (DLSS 3.5) |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The NVS 310 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 4060 has 8 GB. The GeForce RTX 4060 offers 1500% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (NVS 310) vs 24 MB (GeForce RTX 4060) — the GeForce RTX 4060 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | NVS 310 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 8 GB+1500% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 24 MB+2300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (NVS 310) vs 12 Ultimate (GeForce RTX 4060). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | NVS 310 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Fermi NVENC (NVS 310) vs NVENC 8th gen (GeForce RTX 4060). Decoder: VP4 vs NVDEC 5th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (NVS 310) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,AV1 (GeForce RTX 4060).
| Feature | NVS 310 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Fermi NVENC | NVENC 8th gen |
| Decoder | VP4 | NVDEC 5th gen |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.264,H.265/HEVC,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The NVS 310 draws 68W versus the GeForce RTX 4060's 115W — a 51.4% difference. The NVS 310 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (NVS 310) vs 550W (GeForce RTX 4060). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 8-pin. Card length: 145mm vs 240mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 73°C.
| Feature | NVS 310 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 68W-41% | 115W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-36% | 550W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 8-pin |
| Length | 145mm | 240mm |
| Height | 69mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 73°C-3% |
| Perf/Watt | 4.0 | 170.0+4150% |
Value Analysis
The NVS 310 launched at $159 MSRP and currently averages $10, while the GeForce RTX 4060 launched at $299 and now averages $299. The NVS 310 costs 96.7% less ($289 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 27.5 (NVS 310) vs 65.4 (GeForce RTX 4060) — the GeForce RTX 4060 offers 137.8% better value. The GeForce RTX 4060 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2015).
| Feature | NVS 310 | GeForce RTX 4060 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $159-47% | $299 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-97% | $299 |
| Performance per Dollar | 27.5 | 65.4+138% |
| Codename | GM107 | AD107 |
| Release | November 4 2015 | May 18 2023 |
| Ranking | #826 | #84 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on NVS 310 and GeForce RTX 4060
