GeForce GT 425M vs 710M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

GeForce 710M
2013
2 GB DDR3, 15 Watt
1.19

GT 425M outperforms 710M by a moderate 14% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking1022971
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.260.29
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameN14M-GLN11P-GS
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 April 2013 (11 years ago)15 August 2010 (13 years ago)
Current price$44 $45

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GT 425M has 12% better value for money than GeForce 710M.

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 cores9696
CUDA coresno data96
Core clock speed775 MHz560 MHz
Boost clock speed800 MHzno data
Number of transistors915 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate11.506.7 billion/sec
Floating-point performance297.6 gflops215.04 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce 710M and GeForce GT 425M 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.

Laptop sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 2.0 x16
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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB1 GB
Standard memory configurationDDR3no data
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s25.6 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 2560x1600no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 2560x1600no data
HDMI+no data
HDCP content protection+no data
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+no data
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+no data

Supported technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Support+no data
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 API
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.11.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 710M 1.19
GT 425M 1.36
+14.3%

GT 425M outperforms 710M by 14% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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 710M 460
GT 425M 527
+14.6%

GT 425M outperforms 710M by 15% in Passmark.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GeForce 710M 1107
+46.9%
GT 425M 753

710M outperforms GT 425M by 47% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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 710M 4641
+37.3%
GT 425M 3381

710M outperforms GT 425M by 37% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GeForce 710M 2462
+32.4%
GT 425M 1860

710M outperforms GT 425M by 32% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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:

900p9−10
−22.2%
11
+22.2%
Full HD14−16
−14.3%
16
+14.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 1−2

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 1−2
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

This is how GeForce 710M and GT 425M compete in popular games:

  • GT 425M is 22% faster in 900p
  • GT 425M is 14% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 425M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 425M is ahead in 20 tests (41%)
  • there's a draw in 29 tests (59%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.19 1.36
Recency 1 April 2013 15 August 2010
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 23 Watt

The GeForce GT 425M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 710M in performance tests.


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 710M
GeForce 710M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 425M
GeForce GT 425M

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.


3.2 638 votes

Rate GeForce 710M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 51 vote

Rate GeForce GT 425M 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.