Radeon RX 6750 XT vs GeForce 315M

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated47
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data51.67
Power efficiencyno data14.94
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGT218Navi 22
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date5 January 2011 (13 years ago)3 March 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$549

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores162560
Core clock speed606 MHz2150 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2600 MHz
Number of transistors260 million17,200 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate4.848416.0
Floating-point processing power0.03878 TFLOPS13.31 TFLOPS
Gigaflops73no data
ROPs464
TMUs8160
Ray Tracing Coresno data40

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amountUp to 512 MB12 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/s432.0 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 ConnectorsDisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
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

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.5
OpenGL4.14.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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 315M 115
RX 6750 XT 20810
+17996%

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 315M 1109
RX 6750 XT 104004
+9282%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 5 January 2011 3 March 2022
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 250 Watt

GeForce 315M has 1685.7% lower power consumption.

RX 6750 XT, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 315M and Radeon RX 6750 XT. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 315M is a notebook card while Radeon RX 6750 XT is a desktop 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 315M
GeForce 315M
AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT
Radeon RX 6750 XT

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.


3.1 156 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 2478 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6750 XT 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.