UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs vs GeForce 310M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 310M and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

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

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs outperforms 310M by a whopping 1371% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1325656
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.5211.16
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGT218Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date10 January 2010 (14 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 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 cores1648
Core clock speed606 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1450 MHz
Number of transistors260 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate4.848no data
Floating-point processing power0.04896 TFLOPSno data
Gigaflops73no data
ROPs4no data
TMUs8no data

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).

Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amountUp to 1 GBno data
Memory bus width64 Bitno data
Memory clock speedUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHzno data
Memory bandwidth10.67 GB/sno data
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 DVIno data
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no data
Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12_1
Shader Model4.1no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/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
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 4.56
+1371%

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.

GeForce 310M 1123
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 10650
+848%

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 HD1−2
−1700%
18
+1700%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−450%
11
+450%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−333%
12−14
+333%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Hitman 3 4−5
−150%
10
+150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−350%
36
+350%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−325%
16−18
+325%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−60.7%
45−50
+60.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−333%
12−14
+333%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Hitman 3 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−325%
17
+325%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−88.9%
16−18
+88.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−60.7%
45−50
+60.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−333%
12−14
+333%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Hitman 3 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−50%
12
+50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−300%
16
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+12.5%
8
−12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−60.7%
45−50
+60.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 2−3
Hitman 3 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 2−3

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12
+0%
12
+0%
Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how GeForce 310M and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 1700% faster in 1080p

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GeForce 310M is 13% faster.
  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 450% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GeForce 310M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is ahead in 28 tests (43%)
  • there's a draw in 36 tests (55%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.31 4.56
Recency 10 January 2010 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 40 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 28 Watt

GeForce 310M has 100% lower power consumption.

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, on the other hand, has a 1371% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 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
Intel UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs

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
3.6 465 votes

Rate UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 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.