GeForce FX 5800 Ultra vs 310M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1360not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.61no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameGT218NV30
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date10 January 2010 (15 years ago)6 March 2003 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$399

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 cores16no data
Core clock speed606 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors260 million125 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Wattno data
Texture fill rate4.8484.000
Floating-point processing power0.04896 TFLOPSno data
Gigaflops73no data
ROPs44
TMUs88

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 x16AGP 8x
Lengthno data213 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x Molex

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 typeDDR3GDDR2
Maximum RAM amountUp to 1 GB128 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz500 MHz
Memory bandwidth10.67 GB/s16 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 DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
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 compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)9.0a
Shader Model4.1no data
OpenGL3.31.5 (2.1)
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 10 January 2010 6 March 2003
Chip lithography 40 nm 130 nm

GeForce 310M has an age advantage of 6 years, and a 225% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 310M and GeForce FX 5800 Ultra. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 310M is a notebook graphics card while GeForce FX 5800 Ultra is a desktop one.

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
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5800 Ultra
GeForce FX 5800 Ultra

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.


2.9 485 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 11 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5800 Ultra 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 FX 5800 Ultra, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.