Radeon HD 6310 vs GeForce 930M

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking811not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.50no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGM108Loveland
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date13 March 2015 (9 years ago)9 November 2010 (14 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 cores38480
Core clock speed549 MHz276 MHz
Boost clock speed549 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data450 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate13.182.208
Floating-point processing power0.4216 TFLOPS0.04416 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs248

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 Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8IGP
Widthno dataIGP
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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed800 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth12.8 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boost2.0no data
Optimus+-
GameWorks+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model6.7 (5.1)5.0
OpenGL4.54.4
OpenCL3.01.2
Vulkan1.3N/A
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 930M 1011
+729%
HD 6310 122

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GeForce 930M 2153
+758%
HD 6310 251

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 930M 7274
+953%
HD 6310 691

Pros & cons summary


Recency 13 March 2015 9 November 2010
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 18 Watt

GeForce 930M has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

HD 6310, on the other hand, has 83.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 930M and Radeon HD 6310. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 930M is a notebook card while Radeon HD 6310 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 930M
GeForce 930M
AMD Radeon HD 6310
Radeon HD 6310

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.


3.1 259 votes

Rate GeForce 930M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 255 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6310 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.