UHD Graphics 615 vs GeForce 310M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in performance rankingnot rated897
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGT2xx (2009−2012)Gen. 9 Amber Lake (2018)
GPU code nameN11M-GE1Kaby-Lake GT2
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date10 January 2010 (14 years ago)30 August 2018 (6 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1624
CUDA cores16no data
Core clock speed606 / 625 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1000 MHz
Number of transistors260 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt5 Watt
Texture fill rate4.84825.20
Floating-point performance0.04896 gflops0.4032 gflops
Gigaflops73no data

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 3.0 x1
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 typeGDDR3, DDR3DDR3L/LPDDR3
Maximum RAM amountUp to 1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 Bit64/128 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHzno data
Memory bandwidth10.67 GB/sno data
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 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
Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.1.103
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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
UHD Graphics 615 764
+564%

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
UHD Graphics 615 3813
+240%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 10 January 2010 30 August 2018
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 5 Watt

UHD Graphics 615 has an age advantage of 8 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 180% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 310M and UHD Graphics 615. We've got no test results to judge.


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 UHD Graphics 615
UHD Graphics 615

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.


2.9 428 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 33 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 615 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.