NVS 310 vs GeForce GT 430

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 430 with NVS 310, including specs and performance data.

GT 430
2010
1 GB GDDR3, 49 Watt
1.55
+138%

GT 430 outperforms NVS 310 by a whopping 138% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9661186
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.050.01
Power efficiency2.192.25
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGF108GF119
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date11 October 2010 (14 years ago)26 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$79 $159

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GT 430 has 400% better value for money than NVS 310.

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 cores9648
CUDA cores per GPU96no data
Core clock speed700 MHz523 MHz
Number of transistors585 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)49 Watt20 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature98 °Cno data
Texture fill rate11.204.184
Floating-point processing power0.2688 TFLOPS0.1004 TFLOPS
ROPs44
TMUs168

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 2.0 x 16no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length145 mm156 mm
Height2.713" (6.9 cm)no data
Width1-slot1-slot
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 typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed800 - 900 MHz (1600 - 1800 data rate)875 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 - 28.8 GB/s14 GB/s

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 ConnectorsHDMIVGA (optional)Mini HDMIDual Link DVI2x DisplayPort
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.24.6
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+2.1

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.

GT 430 1.55
+138%
NVS 310 0.65

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.

GT 430 599
+139%
NVS 310 251

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GT 430 2242
+154%
NVS 310 881

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 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Hitman 3 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+150%
6−7
−150%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+143%
14−16
−143%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Hitman 3 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+150%
6−7
−150%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+143%
14−16
−143%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Hitman 3 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+150%
6−7
−150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+143%
14−16
−143%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

1440p
High Preset

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

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.55 0.65
Recency 11 October 2010 26 June 2012
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 512 MB
Power consumption (TDP) 49 Watt 20 Watt

GT 430 has a 138.5% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

NVS 310, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 145% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 430 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 310 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 430 is a desktop card while NVS 310 is a workstation 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 GT 430
GeForce GT 430
NVIDIA NVS 310
NVS 310

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.


3.3 1115 votes

Rate GeForce GT 430 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 81 vote

Rate NVS 310 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.