UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) vs GeForce G 103M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce G 103M and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) outperforms G 103M by a whopping 1287% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1483 | 917 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 16.04 |
| Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | Gen. 11 (2021) |
| GPU code name | G98 | Gen. 11 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 September 2009 (16 years ago) | 11 January 2021 (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 | 8 | 24 |
| Core clock speed | 640 MHz | 350 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 800 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 4.8 - 10 Watt |
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 | DDR2 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 500 MHz | no data |
| Shared memory | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | no data | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.0 | 12_1 |
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 | 0−1 | 13 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−267%
|
10−12
+267%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−57.1%
|
10−12
+57.1%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−66.7%
|
40−45
+66.7%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 10−12
−291%
|
40−45
+291%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Dota 2 | 8−9
−113%
|
17
+113%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−267%
|
10−12
+267%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−57.1%
|
10−12
+57.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−60%
|
8
+60%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−66.7%
|
40−45
+66.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Dota 2 | 8−9
−100%
|
16
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−267%
|
10−12
+267%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−57.1%
|
10−12
+57.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+25%
|
4
−25%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−66.7%
|
40−45
+66.7%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−950%
|
21−24
+950%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Escape from Tarkov | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
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 G 103M is 25% faster.
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) is 950% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- G 103M performs better in 1 test (2%)
- UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) performs better in 26 tests (47%)
- there's a draw in 28 tests (51%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.15 | 2.08 |
| Recency | 1 September 2009 | 11 January 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 10 nm |
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) has a 1286.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 550% more advanced lithography process.
The UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce G 103M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
