GeForce 210 vs 910M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 910M with GeForce 210, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 910M
2015
DDR3 MB DDR3, 33 Watt
1.32
+389%

910M outperforms 210 by a whopping 389% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9841330
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.190.69
ArchitectureKepler 2.0 (2013−2015)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGK208BGT218
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date13 March 2015 (9 years ago)12 October 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$29.49

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 cores38416
Core clock speed641 MHz589 MHz
Number of transistors915 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt30.5 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate20.514.160
Floating-point processing power0.4923 TFLOPS0.03936 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs328

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 Express 3.0PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
Heightno data2.731" (6.9 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDR3GDDR2
Maximum RAM amountDDR3 MB512 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1001 MHz500 MHz
Memory bandwidth16.02 GB/s8.0 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 outputsDVIVGADisplayPort
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boost2.0no data
Optimus+-
GameWorks+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.53.1
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/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.

GeForce 910M 1.32
+389%
GeForce 210 0.27

  • Passmark

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.

GeForce 910M 589
+387%
GeForce 210 121

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 HD9
+800%
1−2
−800%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data29.49

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Atomic Heart 4−5 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Atomic Heart 4−5 0−1
Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Fortnite 4−5 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Valorant 35−40
+400%
7−8
−400%
Atomic Heart 4−5 0−1
Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30
+400%
6−7
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Dota 2 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Fortnite 4−5 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Valorant 35−40
+400%
7−8
−400%
Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Dota 2 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Valorant 35−40
+400%
7−8
−400%
Fortnite 4−5 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Valorant 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 0−1
Fortnite 2−3 0−1
Atomic Heart 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Valorant 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3 0−1
Fortnite 3−4 0−1

This is how GeForce 910M and GeForce 210 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce 910M is 800% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.32 0.27
Recency 13 March 2015 12 October 2009
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 30 Watt

GeForce 910M has a 388.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 210, on the other hand, has 10% lower power consumption.

The GeForce 910M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 210 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 910M is a notebook card while GeForce 210 is a desktop one.

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 910M
GeForce 910M
NVIDIA GeForce 210
GeForce 210

Other comparisons

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.


2.4
60 votes

Rate GeForce 910M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6
3748 votes

Rate GeForce 210 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 910M or GeForce 210, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.