GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile vs 310M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 310M and GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce 310M
2010
Up to 1 GB DDR3, 14 Watt
0.31
RTX 3050 Ti Mobile
2021
4 GB GDDR6, 75 Watt
24.18
+7700%

RTX 3050 Ti Mobile outperforms 310M by a whopping 7700% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1400263
Place by popularitynot in top-10058
Power efficiency1.7124.94
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameGT218GA106
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date10 January 2010 (16 years ago)11 May 2021 (5 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores162560
Core clock speed606 MHz735 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1035 MHz
Number of transistors260 million13,250 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate4.84882.80
Floating-point processing power0.04896 TFLOPS5.299 TFLOPS
Gigaflops73no data
ROPs448
TMUs880
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Coresno data20
L1 Cacheno data2.5 MB
L2 Cache32 KB2 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amountUp to 1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth10.67 GB/s192.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsDisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power management8.0no data

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.6
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA+8.6
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GeForce 310M 0.31
RTX 3050 Ti Mobile 24.18
+7700%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GeForce 310M 128
Samples: 1352
RTX 3050 Ti Mobile 10072
+7769%
Samples: 10981

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD0−175
1440p0−142
4K-0−127

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−6100%
62
+6100%
Palworld 3−4
−1933%
60−65
+1933%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−5800%
59
+5800%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−3167%
95−100
+3167%
Palworld 3−4
−1933%
60−65
+1933%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1286%
95−100
+1286%
Valorant 24−27
−572%
160−170
+572%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
−1750%
250−260
+1750%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4400%
45
+4400%
Dota 2 9−10
−1211%
118
+1211%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−3167%
95−100
+3167%
Palworld 3−4
−1933%
60−65
+1933%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1286%
95−100
+1286%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−1433%
92
+1433%
Valorant 24−27
−572%
160−170
+572%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3900%
40
+3900%
Dota 2 9−10
−1156%
113
+1156%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−3167%
95−100
+3167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1286%
95−100
+1286%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−733%
50
+733%
Valorant 24−27
−348%
112
+348%

Full HD
Epic

Palworld 3−4
−1933%
60−65
+1933%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−2550%
50−55
+2550%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 0−1 170−180
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−5733%
170−180
+5733%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−6300%
60−65
+6300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%

1440p
Epic

Palworld 0−1 30−35

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−193%
44
+193%
Valorant 5−6
−2660%
130−140
+2660%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−2500%
24−27
+2500%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−1250%
27−30
+1250%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 75
+0%
75
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 108
+0%
108
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 79
+0%
79
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 98
+0%
98
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 74
+0%
74
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 94
+0%
94
+0%
Metro Exodus 57
+0%
57
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 89
+0%
89
+0%
Far Cry 5 68
+0%
68
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
High

Grand Theft Auto V 41
+0%
41
+0%
Metro Exodus 34
+0%
34
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 69
+0%
69
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 22
+0%
22
+0%
Far Cry 5 50
+0%
50
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 21
+0%
21
+0%
Palworld 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+0%
29
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Dota 2 54
+0%
54
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Epic

Palworld 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is 6300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 3050 Ti Mobile performs better in 30 tests (48%)
  • there's a draw in 33 tests (52%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.31 24.18
Recency 10 January 2010 11 May 2021
Chip lithography 40 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 75 Watt

GeForce 310M has 436% lower power consumption.

RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, on the other hand, has a 7700% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 400% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 310M in performance tests.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.9 499 votes

Rate GeForce 310M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 4895 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 310M or GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.