GeForce GT 415M vs GT 1030

Place in the ranking	573	1155
Place by popularity	36	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.31	no data
Power efficiency	14.76	4.29
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	GP108	GF108
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	17 May 2017 (7 years ago)	3 September 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$79	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	384	48
Core clock speed	1228 MHz	500 MHz
Boost clock speed	1468 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,800 million	585 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	12 Watt
Texture fill rate	35.23	4.000
Floating-point processing power	1.127 TFLOPS	0.096 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	4
TMUs	24	8

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).

Laptop size	no data	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x4	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	145 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	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	GDDR5	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1502 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	48.06 GB/s	25.6 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI	No outputs
HDMI	+	-
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
CUDA	6.1	+

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.

GT 1030 6.37
+761%

GT 415M 0.74

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.

GT 1030 2456
+759%

GT 415M 286

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.

GT 1030 4728
+1147%

GT 415M 379

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.

GT 1030 9783
+1203%

GT 415M 751

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	24 +1100%	2−3 −1100%
1440p	19 +850%	2−3 −850%
4K	9 +800%	1−2 −800%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.29	no data
1440p	4.16	no data
4K	8.78	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

15
+400%

3−4

−400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18 +260%	5−6 −260%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9	0−1
Battlefield 5	22 +1000%	2−3 −1000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18 +500%	3−4 −500%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +267%	3−4 −267%
Far Cry 5	21 +950%	2−3 −950%
Far Cry New Dawn	27 +2600%	1−2 −2600%
Forza Horizon 4	93 +830%	10−11 −830%
Hitman 3	16 +220%	5−6 −220%
Horizon Zero Dawn	152 +1282%	10−12 −1282%
Metro Exodus	26 +767%	3−4 −767%
Red Dead Redemption 2	31	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	37 +517%	6−7 −517%
Watch Dogs: Legion	93 +200%	30−35 −200%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24 +380%	5−6 −380%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9	0−1
Battlefield 5	18−20 +800%	2−3 −800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16 +433%	3−4 −433%
Cyberpunk 2077	7 +133%	3−4 −133%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Far Cry New Dawn	20 +1900%	1−2 −1900%
Forza Horizon 4	84 +833%	9−10 −833%
Hitman 3	15 +200%	5−6 −200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	123 +1018%	10−12 −1018%
Metro Exodus	20 +900%	2−3 −900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	15	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	19 +217%	6−7 −217%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 +100%	10−11 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	84 +171%	30−35 −171%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7 +40%	5−6 −40%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Forza Horizon 4	16 +1500%	1−2 −1500%
Hitman 3	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Horizon Zero Dawn	19 +72.7%	10−12 −72.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16 +167%	6−7 −167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12 +20%	10−11 −20%
Watch Dogs: Legion	6 −417%	30−35 +417%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +900%	2−3 −900%
Hitman 3	10−11 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14 +367%	3−4 −367%
Metro Exodus	6−7	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	11 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	48 +2300%	2−3 −2300%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12
+267%

3−4

−267%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	4	0−1
Hitman 3	3−4	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +1600%	1−2 −1600%
Metro Exodus	3−4	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1 +0%	1−2 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	7	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+250%

2−3

−250%

This is how GT 1030 and GT 415M compete in popular games:

GT 1030 is 1100% faster in 1080p
GT 1030 is 850% faster in 1440p
GT 1030 is 800% faster in 4K

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

in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 1030 is 2600% faster.
in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 415M is 417% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GT 1030 is ahead in 33 tests (94%)
GT 415M is ahead in 1 test (3%)
there's a draw in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.37	0.74
Recency	17 May 2017	3 September 2010
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	12 Watt

GT 1030 has a 760.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

GT 415M, on the other hand, has 150% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 1030 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 415M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 1030 is a desktop card while GeForce GT 415M is a notebook one.

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