NVS 310 vs Radeon RX 7600
NVS 310
Popular choices:
Radeon RX 7600
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 Radeon RX 7600
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon RX 7600 is significantly newer (2023 vs 2015). The Radeon RX 7600 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 Radeon RX 7600 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 5929.5% 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 | Radeon RX 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-5929.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+5929.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🏆Elite Architecture (RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) / 6nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ FSR 3 / AFMF 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 Radeon RX 7600 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $250 (vs $10), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 141.2% better value per dollar than the NVS 310.
| Insight | NVS 310 | Radeon RX 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+141.2%) |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($10) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($250) |
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 Radeon RX 7600
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.
Radeon RX 7600
The Radeon RX 7600 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 24 2023. It features the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1720 MHz to 2655 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 165W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 32 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 16,581 points. Launch price was $269.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the NVS 310 scores 275 versus the Radeon RX 7600's 16,581 — the Radeon RX 7600 leads by 5929.5%. The NVS 310 is built on Maxwell while the Radeon RX 7600 uses RDNA 3.0, both on 28 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 512 (NVS 310) vs 2,048 (Radeon RX 7600). Raw compute: 1.058 TFLOPS ×2 (NVS 310) vs 21.75 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 7600). Boost clocks: 1033 MHz vs 2655 MHz.
| Feature | NVS 310 | Radeon RX 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 275 | 16,581+5929% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | RDNA 3.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 512 ×2 | 2048+300% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.058 TFLOPS ×2 | 21.75 TFLOPS+1956% |
| Boost Clock | 1033 MHz | 2655 MHz+157% |
| ROPs | 16 ×2 | 64+300% |
| TMUs | 32 ×2 | 128+300% |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 7600 is support for FSR 3 / AFMF. 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 | Radeon RX 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 3 (Native) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 / AFMF (Driver) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The NVS 310 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon RX 7600 has 8 GB. The Radeon RX 7600 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 2 MB (Radeon RX 7600) — the Radeon RX 7600 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | NVS 310 | Radeon RX 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 8 GB+1500% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (NVS 310) vs 12.2 (Radeon RX 7600). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | NVS 310 | Radeon RX 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12.2+2% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Fermi NVENC (NVS 310) vs VCN 4.0 (Radeon RX 7600). Decoder: VP4 vs VCN 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (NVS 310) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Radeon RX 7600).
| Feature | NVS 310 | Radeon RX 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Fermi NVENC | VCN 4.0 |
| Decoder | VP4 | VCN 4.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The NVS 310 draws 68W versus the Radeon RX 7600's 165W — a 83.3% difference. The NVS 310 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (NVS 310) vs 550W (Radeon RX 7600). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 8-pin. Card length: 145mm vs 240mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | NVS 310 | Radeon RX 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 68W-59% | 165W |
| 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 | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 4.0 | 100.5+2413% |
Value Analysis
The NVS 310 launched at $159 MSRP and currently averages $10, while the Radeon RX 7600 launched at $269 and now averages $250. The NVS 310 costs 96% less ($240 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 27.5 (NVS 310) vs 66.3 (Radeon RX 7600) — the Radeon RX 7600 offers 141.1% better value. The Radeon RX 7600 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2015).
| Feature | NVS 310 | Radeon RX 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $159-41% | $269 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-96% | $250 |
| Performance per Dollar | 27.5 | 66.3+141% |
| Codename | GM107 | Navi 33 |
| Release | November 4 2015 | May 24 2023 |
| Ranking | #826 | #118 |
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 Radeon RX 7600
