GeForce MX450 vs NVS 310

Place in the ranking	1188	458
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.03	no data
Power efficiency	2.27	27.01
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GF119	N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	26 June 2012 (12 years ago)	1 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$159	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	48	896
Core clock speed	523 MHz	1395 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1575 MHz
Number of transistors	292 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	25 Watt (12 - 29 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate	4.184	100.8
Floating-point processing power	0.1004 TFLOPS	3.226 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	32
TMUs	8	64

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Length	156 mm	no data
Width	1-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	DDR3	GDDR5, GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	2 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	875 MHz	10000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14 GB/s	64.03 GB/s
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

2x DisplayPort

No outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
CUDA	2.1	7.5

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.

NVS 310 0.65

GeForce MX450 9.68
+1389%

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.

NVS 310 251

GeForce MX450 3735
+1388%

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.

NVS 310 881

GeForce MX450 29036
+3196%

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	1−2 −2700%	28 +2700%
1440p	1−2 −1800%	19 +1800%
4K	1−2 −2700%	28 +2700%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	159.00	no data
1440p	159.00	no data
4K	159.00	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10 +0%	10 +0%
Battlefield 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	22 +0%	22 +0%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Hitman 3	30 +0%	30 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Metro Exodus	55 +0%	55 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45 +0%	45 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	94 +0%	94 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6 +0%	6 +0%
Battlefield 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	13 +0%	13 +0%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Hitman 3	29 +0%	29 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Metro Exodus	37 +0%	37 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40 +0%	40 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	89 +0%	89 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	11 +0%	11 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	8 +0%	8 +0%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Hitman 3	25 +0%	25 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24 +0%	24 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30 +0%	30 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20 +0%	20 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7 +0%	7 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7 +0%	7 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Hitman 3	18 +0%	18 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18 +0%	18 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Metro Exodus	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10

+0%

9−10

+0%

This is how NVS 310 and GeForce MX450 compete in popular games:

GeForce MX450 is 2700% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX450 is 1800% faster in 1440p
GeForce MX450 is 2700% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.65	9.68
Recency	26 June 2012	1 August 2020
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	2 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	25 Watt

NVS 310 has 25% lower power consumption.

GeForce MX450, on the other hand, has a 1389.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce MX450 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 310 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 310 is a workstation card while GeForce MX450 is a notebook one.

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