GeForce RTX 3060 vs NVS 310

Place in the ranking	1186	81
Place by popularity	not in top-100	4
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.01	71.39
Power efficiency	2.25	18.03
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GF119	GA106
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	26 June 2012 (12 years ago)	12 January 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$159	$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 3060 has 713800% 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 cores	48	3584
Core clock speed	523 MHz	1320 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1777 MHz
Number of transistors	292 million	12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	170 Watt
Texture fill rate	4.184	199.0
Floating-point processing power	0.1004 TFLOPS	12.74 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	48
TMUs	8	112
Tensor Cores	no data	112
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	28

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	156 mm	242 mm
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 12-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 type	DDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	12 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	875 MHz	1875 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14 GB/s	360.0 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

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	2x DisplayPort	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	2.1	8.6

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.

NVS 310 0.65

RTX 3060 44.29
+6714%

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.

NVS 310 251

RTX 3060 17085
+6707%

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.

NVS 310 881

RTX 3060 88251
+9917%

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 HD	1−2 −12300%	124 +12300%
1440p	1−2 −8000%	81 +8000%
4K	0−1	52

Cost per frame, $

1080p	159.00	2.65
1440p	159.00	4.06
4K	no data	6.33

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	102 +0%	102 +0%
Battlefield 5	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	78 +0%	78 +0%
Far Cry 5	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%
Hitman 3	120 +0%	120 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Metro Exodus	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	85 +0%	85 +0%
Battlefield 5	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	75 +0%	75 +0%
Far Cry 5	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%
Hitman 3	116 +0%	116 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Metro Exodus	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	180 +0%	180 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	75 +0%	75 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	64 +0%	64 +0%
Far Cry 5	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%
Hitman 3	101 +0%	101 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	142 +0%	142 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	154 +0%	154 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	73 +0%	73 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	59 +0%	59 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

95−100

+0%

95−100

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	60 +0%	60 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	39 +0%	39 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	240−250 +0%	240−250 +0%
Hitman 3	68 +0%	68 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	106 +0%	106 +0%
Metro Exodus	89 +0%	89 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	115 +0%	115 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

75−80

+0%

75−80

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Hitman 3	45 +0%	45 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	63 +0%	63 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	38 +0%	38 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18 +0%	18 +0%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	67 +0%	67 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27 +0%	27 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

40−45

+0%

40−45

+0%

This is how NVS 310 and RTX 3060 compete in popular games:

RTX 3060 is 12300% faster in 1080p
RTX 3060 is 8000% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.65	44.29
Recency	26 June 2012	12 January 2021
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	12 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	170 Watt

NVS 310 has 750% lower power consumption.

RTX 3060, on the other hand, has a 6713.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 400% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3060 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 310 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 310 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce RTX 3060 is a desktop one.

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