T400 vs NVS 3100M

Place in performance ranking	1187	440
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	16.46
Architecture	GT2xx (2009−2012)	Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code name	N10M-NS	TU117
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	7 January 2010 (14 years ago)	6 May 2021 (3 years ago)
Current price	$269	$83

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

NVS 3100M and T400 have a nearly equal value for money.

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	16	384
Core clock speed	600 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	no data	1425 MHz
Number of transistors	260 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	14 Watt	30 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.848	34.20
Floating-point performance	46.98 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on NVS 3100M and T400 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.

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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, DDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	2 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	10 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	12.64 GB/s	80 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

No outputs

3x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	4.1	6.6
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
CUDA	1.2	7.5

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.

NVS 3100M 0.53

T400 9.40
+1674%

T400 outperforms NVS 3100M by 1674% based on our aggregate 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%

NVS 3100M 204

T400 3630
+1679%

T400 outperforms NVS 3100M by 1679% in Passmark.

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 Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−1567%

50−55
+1567%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Hitman 3	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −1627%	190−200 +1627%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −1614%	120−130 +1614%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 −1567%	150−160 +1567%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Hitman 3	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −1627%	190−200 +1627%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −1614%	120−130 +1614%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 −1567%	150−160 +1567%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −1627%	190−200 +1627%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −1614%	120−130 +1614%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 −1567%	150−160 +1567%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −1650%	70−75 +1650%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Hitman 3	6−7 −1567%	100−105 +1567%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−1567%

50−55
+1567%

4K
High Preset

Horizon Zero Dawn

1−2

−1500%

16−18
+1500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Metro Exodus	4−5 −1650%	70−75 +1650%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−1650%

35−40
+1650%

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.53	9.40
Recency	7 January 2010	6 May 2021
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	2 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	14 Watt	30 Watt