Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB vs GeForce 310M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 310M with Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, including specs and performance data.
RX 9060 XT 16 GB outperforms 310M by a whopping 15933% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1361 | 75 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 70 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 81.72 |
| Power efficiency | 1.63 | 22.91 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | RDNA 4.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | GT218 | Navi 44 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 10 January 2010 (15 years ago) | 4 June 2025 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $349 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 cores | 16 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 606 MHz | 1700 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 3130 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 260 million | 29,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 14 Watt | 160 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.848 | 400.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.04896 TFLOPS | 25.64 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | 73 | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 64 |
| TMUs | 8 | 128 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 32 |
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 support | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 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 type | DDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | Up to 1 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz | 2518 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 10.67 GB/s | 322.3 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 Connectors | DisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | 8.0 | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| 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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−15900%
|
160−170
+15900%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−14900%
|
600−650
+14900%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−15900%
|
160−170
+15900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−14900%
|
450−500
+14900%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−14900%
|
600−650
+14900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−15614%
|
1100−1150
+15614%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−15900%
|
4000−4050
+15900%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
−15669%
|
2050−2100
+15669%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−15900%
|
160−170
+15900%
|
| Dota 2 | 9−10
−15456%
|
1400−1450
+15456%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−14900%
|
450−500
+14900%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−14900%
|
600−650
+14900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−15614%
|
1100−1150
+15614%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−15900%
|
800−850
+15900%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−15900%
|
4000−4050
+15900%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−15900%
|
160−170
+15900%
|
| Dota 2 | 9−10
−15456%
|
1400−1450
+15456%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−14900%
|
450−500
+14900%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−14900%
|
600−650
+14900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−15614%
|
1100−1150
+15614%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−15900%
|
800−850
+15900%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−15900%
|
4000−4050
+15900%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−14900%
|
300−310
+14900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−14900%
|
450−500
+14900%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−15900%
|
160−170
+15900%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−15900%
|
2400−2450
+15900%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−14900%
|
300−310
+14900%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−15900%
|
160−170
+15900%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−14900%
|
300−310
+14900%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.30 | 48.10 |
| Recency | 10 January 2010 | 4 June 2025 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 14 Watt | 160 Watt |
GeForce 310M has 1042.9% lower power consumption.
RX 9060 XT 16 GB, on the other hand, has a 15933.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, and a 900% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 310M in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce 310M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
