Radeon RX Vega 3 vs GeForce 315 OEM

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated778
Place by popularitynot in top-10080
Power efficiencyno data13.85
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGT216Picasso
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date31 March 2010 (14 years ago)6 January 2019 (5 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 cores48192
Core clock speed475 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1001 MHz
Number of transistors486 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate7.60012.01
Floating-point processing power0.1056 TFLOPS0.3844 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs1612

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16IGP
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount512 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed790 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth12.64 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGANo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA1.2-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 31 March 2010 6 January 2019
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 15 Watt

RX Vega 3 has an age advantage of 8 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 120% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 315 OEM and Radeon RX Vega 3. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 315 OEM is a desktop card while Radeon RX Vega 3 is a notebook 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.


NVIDIA GeForce 315 OEM
GeForce 315 OEM
AMD Radeon RX Vega 3
Radeon RX Vega 3

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 24 votes

Rate GeForce 315 OEM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1966 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 3 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.