UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs vs GeForce 310M

Place in the ranking	1324	656
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.52	11.15
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code name	GT218	Tiger Lake Xe
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	10 January 2010 (14 years ago)	15 August 2020 (4 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 cores	16	48
Core clock speed	606 MHz	350 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1450 MHz
Number of transistors	260 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	14 Watt	28 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.848	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.04896 TFLOPS	no data
Gigaflops	73	no data
ROPs	4	no data
TMUs	8	no 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 support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no 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 type	DDR3	no data
Maximum RAM amount	Up to 1 GB	no data
Memory bus width	64 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	Up to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	10.67 GB/s	no 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 Connectors	DisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI	no data
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
Quick Sync	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12_1
Shader Model	4.1	no data
OpenGL	3.3	no data
OpenCL	1.1	no data
Vulkan	N/A	-
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

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 4.56
+1371%

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 Xe G4 48EUs 10650
+848%

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 HD

1−2

−1700%

18
+1700%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

2−3

−450%

11
+450%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −333%	12−14 +333%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −400%	10−11 +400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Hitman 3	4−5 −150%	10 +150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −350%	36 +350%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −325%	16−18 +325%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −60.7%	45−50 +60.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −333%	12−14 +333%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −400%	10−11 +400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Hitman 3	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −275%	30−33 +275%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −325%	17 +325%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −88.9%	16−18 +88.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −60.7%	45−50 +60.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −333%	12−14 +333%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −400%	10−11 +400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Hitman 3	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −50%	12 +50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −300%	16 +300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +12.5%	8 −12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −60.7%	45−50 +60.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	2−3
Hitman 3	6−7 −50%	9−10 +50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2−3 −400%	10−11 +400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−300%

8−9
+300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	2−3

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−150%

5−6
+150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12 +0%	12 +0%
Battlefield 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Battlefield 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14

+0%

12−14

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Hitman 3	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

This is how GeForce 310M and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs compete in popular games:

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 1700% faster in 1080p

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

in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GeForce 310M is 13% faster.
in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 450% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GeForce 310M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is ahead in 28 tests (43%)
there's a draw in 36 tests (55%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.31	4.56
Recency	10 January 2010	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	40 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	14 Watt	28 Watt

GeForce 310M has 100% lower power consumption.

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, on the other hand, has a 1371% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 310M in performance tests.

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