GeForce GTS 150M vs 310M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 310M and GeForce GTS 150M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce 310M
2010
Up to 1 GB DDR3, 14 Watt
0.31

GTS 150M outperforms 310M by a whopping 323% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13251031
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.522.00
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGT218G94
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date10 January 2010 (14 years ago)3 March 2009 (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 cores1664
Core clock speed606 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistors260 million505 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate4.84812.80
Floating-point processing power0.04896 TFLOPS0.128 TFLOPS
Gigaflops73192
ROPs416
TMUs832

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 datalarge
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data
SLI options-2-way
MXM Typeno dataMXM 3.0 Type-B

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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amountUp to 1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHzUp to 800 MHz
Memory bandwidth10.67 GB/s51 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 ConnectorsDisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVIDisplayPortHDMIDual Link DVILVDSSingle Link DVIVGA
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x15362048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.08.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model4.14.0
OpenGL3.32.1
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA++

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.

GeForce 310M 0.31
GTS 150M 1.31
+323%

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.

GeForce 310M 118
GTS 150M 504
+327%

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 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Hitman 3 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−75%
14−16
+75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−17.9%
30−35
+17.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Hitman 3 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−75%
14−16
+75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−17.9%
30−35
+17.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Hitman 3 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−75%
14−16
+75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−17.9%
30−35
+17.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 1−2
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 1−2

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

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

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTS 150M is 150% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTS 150M is ahead in 28 tests (61%)
  • there's a draw in 18 tests (39%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.31 1.31
Recency 10 January 2010 3 March 2009
Chip lithography 40 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 45 Watt

GeForce 310M has an age advantage of 10 months, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 221.4% lower power consumption.

GTS 150M, on the other hand, has a 322.6% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GTS 150M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 310M in performance tests.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce 310M
GeForce 310M
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 150M
GeForce GTS 150M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.9 454 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 2 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 150M 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.