Radeon RX Vega Nano vs HD 6310
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | Loveland | Vega 10 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 9 November 2010 (14 years ago) | no data (2024 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 cores | 80 | 4096 |
| Core clock speed | 276 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1546 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 450 million | 12,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 175 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 2.208 | 395.8 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.04416 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 64 |
| TMUs | 8 | 256 |
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 | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 152 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 8-pin |
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 | System Shared | HBM2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 2048 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 1600 MBps |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 409.6 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 Connectors | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |
| HDMI | - | + |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 175 Watt |
HD 6310 has 872.2% lower power consumption.
RX Vega Nano, on the other hand, has a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 6310 and Radeon RX Vega Nano. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Radeon HD 6310 is a notebook card while Radeon RX Vega Nano is a desktop 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.
