RTX A1000 Mobile vs Radeon HD 6310

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6310 with RTX A1000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

HD 6310
2010
18 Watt
0.32

RTX A1000 Mobile outperforms HD 6310 by a whopping 7647% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1313222
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.2328.60
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameLovelandGA107
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date9 November 2010 (14 years ago)30 March 2022 (2 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 cores802048
Core clock speed276 MHz630 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1140 MHz
Number of transistors450 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate2.20872.96
Floating-point processing power0.04416 TFLOPS4.669 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs864
Tensor Coresno data64
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x8

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1375 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data176.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.7
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.23.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.6

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.

HD 6310 0.32
RTX A1000 Mobile 24.79
+7647%

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.

HD 6310 122
RTX A1000 Mobile 9537
+7717%

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.

HD 6310 251
RTX A1000 Mobile 15135
+5930%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

HD 6310 691
RTX A1000 Mobile 58312
+8339%

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 HD0−169
1440p-0−127

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−2950%
61
+2950%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1600%
50−55
+1600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−2250%
45−50
+2250%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−2400%
50
+2400%
Hitman 3 4−5
−1050%
45−50
+1050%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1250%
100−110
+1250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−1825%
75−80
+1825%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−254%
95−100
+254%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1600%
50−55
+1600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−2250%
45−50
+2250%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1750%
37
+1750%
Hitman 3 4−5
−1050%
45−50
+1050%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1250%
100−110
+1250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−2075%
87
+2075%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−456%
50−55
+456%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−254%
95−100
+254%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1600%
50−55
+1600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−2250%
45−50
+2250%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1350%
29
+1350%
Hitman 3 4−5
−1050%
45−50
+1050%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1250%
100−110
+1250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−1800%
76
+1800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−378%
43
+378%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+7.7%
26
−7.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 14−16
Hitman 3 6−7
−350%
27−30
+350%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−2250%
45−50
+2250%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−1800%
35−40
+1800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 12−14

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−900%
20−22
+900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50
+0%
50
+0%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 33
+0%
33
+0%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 25
+0%
25
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 22
+0%
22
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD 6310 is 8% faster.
  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RTX A1000 Mobile is 2950% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD 6310 is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • RTX A1000 Mobile is ahead in 28 tests (40%)
  • there's a draw in 41 test (59%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.32 24.79
Recency 9 November 2010 30 March 2022
Chip lithography 40 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 60 Watt

HD 6310 has 233.3% lower power consumption.

RTX A1000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 7646.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 400% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A1000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6310 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6310 is a notebook graphics card while RTX A1000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.


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

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.


AMD Radeon HD 6310
Radeon HD 6310
NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile
RTX A1000 Mobile

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.


2.8 262 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 88 votes

Rate RTX A1000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.