GeForce 310M vs Radeon R5 230

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1203not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.08no data
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameCaicosGT218
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date3 April 2014 (10 years ago)10 January 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 cores16016
Core clock speedno data606 MHz
Number of transistors370 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)19 Watt14 Watt
Texture fill rate5.0004.848
Floating-point processing power0.2 TFLOPS0.04896 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data73
ROPs44
TMUs88

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 supportPCIe 1.0 x4PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsN/ANone

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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GBUp to 1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedno dataUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth10.67 GB/s10.67 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGADisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
Eyefinity+-
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
​PowerPlay+no data
DDMA audio-no data
Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1111.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.04.1
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.



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.

R5 230 221
+92.2%
GeForce 310M 115

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 April 2014 10 January 2010
Power consumption (TDP) 19 Watt 14 Watt

R5 230 has an age advantage of 4 years.

GeForce 310M, on the other hand, has 35.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R5 230 and GeForce 310M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R5 230 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.


AMD Radeon R5 230
Radeon R5 230
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.


2.8 237 votes

Rate Radeon R5 230 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 437 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.