Radeon 610M vs GeForce GT 430
Aggregate performance score
Radeon 610M outperforms GeForce GT 430 by an impressive 84% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 928 | 753 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 45 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.05 | no data |
Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | RDNA 2 (2020−2022) |
GPU code name | GF108 | RDNA 2 |
Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
Release date | 11 October 2010 (13 years ago) | 20 September 2022 (1 year ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $79 | no data |
Current price | $59 (0.7x MSRP) | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 cores | 96 | 128 |
CUDA cores per GPU | 96 | no data |
Core clock speed | 700 MHz | 400 MHz |
Boost clock speed | no data | 2200 MHz |
Number of transistors | 585 million | no data |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 6 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 49 Watt | 15 Watt |
Maximum GPU temperature | 98 °C | no data |
Texture fill rate | 11.2 billion/sec | 15.20 |
Floating-point performance | 268.8 gflops | no data |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on GeForce GT 430 and Radeon 610M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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 support | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 | no data |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
Length | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | no data |
Height | 2.713" (6.9 cm) | no data |
Width | 2-slot | no data |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
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 | GDDR3 | System Shared |
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | System Shared |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | System Shared |
Memory clock speed | 800 - 900 MHz (1600 - 1800 data rate) | System Shared |
Memory bandwidth | 25.6 - 28.8 GB/s | no data |
Shared memory | no data | - |
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 | HDMIVGA (optional)Mini HDMIDual Link DVI | Portable Device Dependent |
HDMI | + | no data |
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.7 |
OpenGL | 4.2 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.0 |
Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
CUDA | + | no data |
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.
Radeon 610M outperforms GeForce GT 430 by 84% based on our aggregated 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%
Radeon 610M outperforms GeForce GT 430 by 84% in Passmark.
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
Radeon 610M outperforms GeForce GT 430 by 130% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.
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 | 7−8
−85.7%
| 13
+85.7%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−57.1%
|
10−12
+57.1%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−83.3%
|
10−12
+83.3%
|
Hitman 3 | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 12−14
−23.1%
|
16−18
+23.1%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 10−11
−70%
|
17
+70%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−171%
|
19
+171%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
−700%
|
8
+700%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−83.3%
|
10−12
+83.3%
|
Hitman 3 | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 12−14
−23.1%
|
16−18
+23.1%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 10−11
−20%
|
12
+20%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−175%
|
11
+175%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−57.1%
|
10−12
+57.1%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−83.3%
|
10−12
+83.3%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 12−14
−23.1%
|
16−18
+23.1%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−75%
|
7
+75%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
1440p
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
1440p
Ultra Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
4K
High Preset
Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | 1−2 |
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 0−1 | 1−2 |
Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Metro Exodus | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
4K
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
This is how GT 430 and Radeon 610M compete in popular games:
- Radeon 610M is 86% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 610M is 700% faster than the GT 430.
All in all, in popular games:
- Radeon 610M is ahead in 42 tests (98%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (2%)
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 1.55 | 2.85 |
Recency | 11 October 2010 | 20 September 2022 |
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | System Shared |
Chip lithography | 40 nm | 6 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 49 Watt | 15 Watt |
The Radeon 610M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 430 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GT 430 is a desktop card while Radeon 610M is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.