GeForce 210 vs GTX 860M

Place in the ranking	520	1326
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	7.23	0.66
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	GM107	GT218
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	13 January 2014 (10 years ago)	12 October 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$29.49

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 cores	1152 or 640	16
Core clock speed	797 MHz	589 MHz
Boost clock speed	1085 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,870 million	260 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	30.5 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105 °C
Texture fill rate	43.40	4.160
Floating-point processing power	1.389 TFLOPS	0.03936 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	4
TMUs	40	8

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).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	168 mm
Height	no data	2.731" (6.9 cm)
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
SLI options	+	-

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR2
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Standard memory configuration	GDDR5	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	Up to 2500 MHz	500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80.0 GB/s	8.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	DVIVGADisplayPort
Multi monitor support	no data	+
eDP 1.2 signal support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
LVDS signal support	Up to 1920x1200	no data
VGA аnalog display support	Up to 2048x1536	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
HDMI	+	+
HDCP content protection	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	Internal
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	+	-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	+	-

Supported technologies

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

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
Ansel	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	5.1	4.1
OpenGL	4.5	3.1
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/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.

GTX 860M 7.91
+2537%

GeForce 210 0.30

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.

GTX 860M 3047
+2527%

GeForce 210 116

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:

900p	91 +2933%	3−4 −2933%
Full HD	36 +3500%	1−2 −3500%
4K	13	-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

29.49

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

12−14

0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−12	0−1
Battlefield 5	21−24	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14	0−1
Far Cry 5	18−20	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +5100%	1−2 −5100%
Hitman 3	14−16	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +4400%	1−2 −4400%
Metro Exodus	21−24	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +2700%	2−3 −2700%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−12	0−1
Battlefield 5	21−24	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14	0−1
Far Cry 5	18−20	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +5100%	1−2 −5100%
Hitman 3	14−16	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +4400%	1−2 −4400%
Metro Exodus	21−24	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60 +2900%	2−3 −2900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +2700%	2−3 −2700%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−12	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14	0−1
Far Cry 5	18−20	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +5100%	1−2 −5100%
Hitman 3	14−16	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +4400%	1−2 −4400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +2700%	2−3 −2700%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

21−24

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5	0−1
Far Cry 5	9−10	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +2900%	1−2 −2900%
Hitman 3	10−12	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18	0−1
Metro Exodus	10−11	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +4900%	1−2 −4900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14

0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6	0−1
Hitman 3	4−5	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +2700%	1−2 −2700%
Metro Exodus	5−6	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	4−5	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	9−10	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3−4	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9

0−1

This is how GTX 860M and GeForce 210 compete in popular games:

GTX 860M is 2933% faster in 900p
GTX 860M is 3500% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.91	0.30
Recency	13 January 2014	12 October 2009
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	30 Watt

GTX 860M has a 2536.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 210, on the other hand, has 150% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 860M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 210 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 860M is a notebook card while GeForce 210 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.