310M vs 320M

#ad
Buy
VS

General info

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

Place in performance ranking1175not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGT2xx (2009−2012)GT2xx (2009−2012)
GPU code nameMCP89N11M-GE1
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 April 2010 (13 years old)10 January 2010 (14 years old)
Current price$408 $163
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Technical specs

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 cores3216
CUDA coresno data16
Core clock speed450 MHz606 / 625 MHz
Number of transistors486 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt14 Watt
Texture fill rate7.2004.848
Floating-point performanceno data48.96 gflops
Gigaflopsno data73

Size and compatibility

Information on GeForce 320M and GeForce 310M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

Memory

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR3, DDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedUp to 1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem SharedUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidthno data10.67 GB/s
Shared memory+-

Video outputs and ports

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 ConnectorsNo outputsDisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMIno data+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power managementno data8.0

API support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.14.1
OpenGL3.33.3
OpenCLN/A1.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDAno data+

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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GeForce 320M 209
+86.6%
GeForce 310M 112

320M outperforms 310M by 87% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GeForce 320M 1852
+64.9%
GeForce 310M 1123

320M outperforms 310M by 65% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

Advantages and disadvantages


Recency 1 April 2010 10 January 2010
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 14 Watt

We couldn't decide between GeForce 320M and GeForce 310M. 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.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 320M
GeForce 320M
NVIDIA GeForce 310M
GeForce 310M

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 47 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce 320M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 387 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.