GeForce 310M vs GTX 660M Mac Edition

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition and GeForce 310M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 660M Mac Edition
2013
512 MB GDDR5, 50 Watt
1.46
+387%

660M Mac Edition outperforms 310M by a whopping 387% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10201378
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.261.66
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGK107GT218
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 April 2013 (12 years ago)10 January 2010 (15 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 cores38416
Core clock speed950 MHz606 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt14 Watt
Texture fill rate30.404.848
Floating-point processing power0.7296 TFLOPS0.04896 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data73
ROPs164
TMUs328
L1 Cache32 KBno data
L2 Cache256 KB32 KB

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 supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MBUp to 1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHzUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s10.67 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsDisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

Power managementno data8.0

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA3.0+

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 30 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.46 0.30
Recency 1 April 2013 10 January 2010
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 14 Watt

GTX 660M Mac Edition has a 386.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 310M, on the other hand, has 257.1% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 310M in performance tests.

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 GTX 660M Mac Edition
GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition
NVIDIA GeForce 310M
GeForce 310M

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.


2.9 24 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 495 votes

Rate GeForce 310M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition or GeForce 310M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.