Arc A580 vs GeForce 310M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 310M with Arc A580, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 310M
2010
Up to 1 GB DDR3, 14 Watt
0.31

Arc A580 outperforms 310M by a whopping 9900% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1328182
Place by popularitynot in top-10084
Power efficiency1.5212.18
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGT218DG2-512
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date10 January 2010 (15 years ago)10 October 2023 (1 year ago)

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores163072
Core clock speed606 MHz1700 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2000 MHz
Number of transistors260 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate4.848384.0
Floating-point processing power0.04896 TFLOPS12.29 TFLOPS
Gigaflops73no data
ROPs496
TMUs8192
Tensor Coresno data384
Ray Tracing Coresno data24

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).

Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 8-pin

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 GB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth10.67 GB/s512.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsDisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
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 compatibility

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/A1.3
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce 310M 0.31
Arc A580 31.00
+9900%

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 118
Arc A580 11916
+9998%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GeForce 310M 1123
Arc A580 95677
+8420%

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 HD1−2
−10200%
103
+10200%
1440p0−155
4K-0−133

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−1533%
98
+1533%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−9900%
300−310
+9900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−1283%
83
+1283%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−9900%
300−310
+9900%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−4200%
258
+4200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1500%
60−65
+1500%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−1133%
74
+1133%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−9900%
300−310
+9900%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−950%
63
+950%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−3467%
214
+3467%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−2883%
170−180
+2883%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1500%
60−65
+1500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−2000%
100−110
+2000%
World of Tanks 12−14
−2015%
270−280
+2015%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−1017%
67
+1017%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−9900%
300−310
+9900%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1350%
85−90
+1350%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−2850%
177
+2850%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−2883%
170−180
+2883%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−8650%
170−180
+8650%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−37.5%
44
+37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−9900%
300−310
+9900%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−2300%
95−100
+2300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1275%
55
+1275%
Valorant 4−5
−2125%
85−90
+2125%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
−153%
38
+153%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−153%
38
+153%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−9600%
95−100
+9600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−153%
38
+153%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 30−35
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−9900%
200−210
+9900%
Dota 2 14−16
−9900%
1500−1550
+9900%
Valorant 1−2
−4400%
45−50
+4400%

Full HD
Low Preset

Elden Ring 81
+0%
81
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Metro Exodus 134
+0%
134
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Dota 2 86
+0%
86
+0%
Elden Ring 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 86
+0%
86
+0%
Metro Exodus 97
+0%
97
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 37
+0%
37
+0%
Elden Ring 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 37
+0%
37
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
World of Tanks 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130
+0%
130
+0%
Metro Exodus 91
+0%
91
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 19
+0%
19
+0%
Elden Ring 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 73
+0%
73
+0%

This is how GeForce 310M and Arc A580 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A580 is 10200% faster in 1080p

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A580 is 9600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A580 is ahead in 25 tests (46%)
  • there's a draw in 29 tests (54%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.31 31.00
Recency 10 January 2010 10 October 2023
Chip lithography 40 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 175 Watt

GeForce 310M has 1150% lower power consumption.

Arc A580, on the other hand, has a 9900% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A580 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 310M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 310M is a notebook card while Arc A580 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 310M
GeForce 310M
Intel Arc A580
Arc A580

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.


2.9 456 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 331 vote

Rate Arc A580 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.