ATI Radeon HD 4650 vs GeForce 310M

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated1192
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data0.89
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGT218RV730
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date10 January 2010 (14 years ago)10 September 2008 (16 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores16320
Core clock speed606 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors260 million514 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt48 Watt
Texture fill rate4.84819.20
Floating-point processing power0.04896 TFLOPS0.384 TFLOPS
Gigaflops73no data
ROPs48
TMUs832

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 2.0 x16
Lengthno data193 mm
Widthno data1-slot
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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amountUp to 1 GB256 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidth10.67 GB/s22.4 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 DVI2x DVI, 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 compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.14.1
OpenGL3.33.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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



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 115
ATI HD 4650 238
+107%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 10 January 2010 10 September 2008
Chip lithography 40 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 48 Watt

GeForce 310M has an age advantage of 1 year, a 37.5% more advanced lithography process, and 242.9% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 310M and Radeon HD 4650. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 310M is a notebook card while Radeon HD 4650 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
ATI Radeon HD 4650
Radeon HD 4650

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.9 437 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 226 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4650 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.