GeForce 310M vs GTX 960

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 960 with GeForce 310M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 960
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 120 Watt
15.76
+5153%

GTX 960 outperforms 310M by a whopping 5153% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3411326
Place by popularity59not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.05no data
Power efficiency9.161.49
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGM206GT218
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date22 January 2015 (9 years ago)10 January 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 no data

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 cores102416
Core clock speed1127 MHz606 MHz
Boost clock speed1178 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,940 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt14 Watt
Texture fill rate75.394.848
Floating-point processing power2.413 TFLOPS0.04896 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data73
ROPs324
TMUs648

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 3.0PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length241 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Recommended system power (PSU)400 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone
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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GBUp to 1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/sUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth112 GB/s10.67 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2DisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI
Multi monitor support4 displays+
HDMI++
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x15362048x1536
G-SYNC support+-
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-
Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.44.1
OpenGL4.43.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+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 960 15.76
+5153%
GeForce 310M 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 960 6081
+5188%
GeForce 310M 115

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.

GTX 960 30751
+2638%
GeForce 310M 1123

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:

Full HD63
+6200%
1−2
−6200%
4K280−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.16no data
4K7.11no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+1100%
3−4
−1100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 0−1
Battlefield 5 50−55 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Far Cry 5 35−40 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+10000%
1−2
−10000%
Hitman 3 30−33
+650%
4−5
−650%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+888%
8−9
−888%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+5300%
1−2
−5300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+186%
27−30
−186%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+1100%
3−4
−1100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 0−1
Battlefield 5 50−55 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Far Cry 5 35−40 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+10000%
1−2
−10000%
Hitman 3 30−33
+650%
4−5
−650%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+888%
8−9
−888%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+5300%
1−2
−5300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 131
+1356%
9−10
−1356%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+186%
27−30
−186%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+1100%
3−4
−1100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Far Cry 5 35−40 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+10000%
1−2
−10000%
Hitman 3 30−33
+650%
4−5
−650%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+888%
8−9
−888%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+211%
9−10
−211%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+186%
27−30
−186%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 0−1
Far Cry 5 18−20 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+8200%
1−2
−8200%
Hitman 3 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Metro Exodus 27−30 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+9500%
1−2
−9500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+1200%
2−3
−1200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14 0−1
Hitman 3 10−12 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+7800%
1−2
−7800%
Metro Exodus 16−18 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 8−9 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 21−24 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%

This is how GTX 960 and GeForce 310M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 960 is 6200% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 960 is 1500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 960 surpassed GeForce 310M in all 29 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.76 0.30
Recency 22 January 2015 10 January 2010
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 14 Watt

GTX 960 has a 5153.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 310M, on the other hand, has 757.1% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 960 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 310M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 960 is a desktop card while GeForce 310M 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 GTX 960
GeForce GTX 960
NVIDIA GeForce 310M
GeForce 310M

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.


4 3774 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 960 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 450 votes

Rate GeForce 310M 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.