Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game GeForce 320M GeForce 310M
Red Dead Redemption 2 2278% 2418%
Halo: Reach 656% 700%
Cyberpunk 2077 3167% 3359%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2278% 2418%
Doom Eternal 1944% 2065%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 3167% 3359%
Warcraft 3: Reforged 8% 3%
Grand Theft Auto VI 3533% 3747%
Star Wars: Jedi - Fallen Order 3167% 3359%
Dragon Ball Z Kakarot 1367% 1453%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia GeForce 320M are very slightly better than the Nvidia GeForce 310M.

The GeForce 310M has a 175 MHz higher core clock speed than the GeForce 320M, but the GeForce 320M has 8 more Texture Mapping Units than the GeForce 310M. As a result, the GeForce 320M exhibits a 2.2 GTexel/s better Texture Fill Rate than the GeForce 310M. This still holds weight but shader performance is generally more relevant, particularly since both of these GPUs support at least DirectX 10.

The GeForce 310M has a 175 MHz higher core clock speed than the GeForce 320M, but the GeForce 320M has 4 more Render Output Units than the GeForce 310M. As a result, the GeForce 320M exhibits a 1.1 GPixel/s better Pixel Fill Rate than the GeForce 310M. However, both GPUs support DirectX 9 or above, and pixeling performance is only really relevant when comparing older cards.

The GeForce 320M was released less than a year after the GeForce 310M, and so they are likely to have similar driver support for optimizing performance when running the latest games.

The GeForce 310M has 512 MB video memory, but the GeForce 320M does not have an entry, so the two GPUs cannot be reliably compared in this area.

The GeForce 320M has 48 Shader Processing Units and the GeForce 310M has 16. However, the actual shader performance of the GeForce 320M is 45 and the actual shader performance of the GeForce 310M is 25. The GeForce 320M having 20 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the GeForce 320M delivers a marginally smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the GeForce 310M.

The GeForce 320M requires 23 Watts to run and the GeForce 310M requires 14 Watts. The GeForce 320M requires 9 Watts more than the GeForce 310M to run. The difference is not significant enough for the GeForce 320M to have a noticeably larger impact on your yearly electricity bills than the GeForce 310M.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed450 MHzvs625 MHz
Boost Clock-vs-
ArchitectureTesla MCP89Tesla GT218-N11M-GE1
OC Potential Poor vs Poor
Driver Support Poor vs Poor
Release Date01 Apr 2010vs10 Jan 2010
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

Resolution Performance

1366x768 - green tick vs green tick -
1600x900
2.4
green tick vs
2.3
1920x1080
1.7
green tick vs
1.6
2560x1440 - green tick vs green tick -
3840x2160
0.1
green tick vs green tick
0.1

GPU Memory

MemoryN/Avs512 MB
Memory Speed667 MHzvs790 MHz
Memory Bus128 Bitvs64 Bit
Memory TypeDDR3vsDDR3
Memory Bandwidth21.3GB/secvs12.6GB/sec
L2 Cache 0 KB green tick vs green tick 0 KB
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units48vs16
Actual Shader Performance2%vs1%
Technology40nmvs40nm
Texture Mapping Units16vs8
Texture Rate7.2 GTexel/svs5 GTexel/s
Render Output Units8vs4
Pixel Rate3.6 GPixel/svs2.5 GPixel/s
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)2560x1600vs2560x1600
VGA Connections0vs1
DVI Connections0vs1
HDMI Connections0vs1
DisplayPort Connections-vs-
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power23 Wattsvs14 Watts
Recommended PSU--

GPU Features

DirectX10.0vs10.1
Shader Model4.1vs4.1
Open GL3.3vs3.3
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUyesyes
SLI/Crossfirenovsno
Dedicatednovsyes
Comparison

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended ProcessorIntel Core i3-M330 2.13GHzvsIntel Core i3-M330 2.13GHz
Recommended RAM2 GBvs2 GB
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution1024x768vs1024x768

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewOverview
GeForce 320M is an Integrated Mobile Graphics Card based on the Second Revision of the Tesla Architecture.

Architecture
Tesla was NVIDIA's First Unified Shader Architecture.

GPU
It equips a GPU Codenamed Tesla MCP89 which has 4 Stream Multiprocessors activated and thus offers 48 Shader Processing Units, 16 TMUs and 8 ROPs. The Central Unit is clocked at 450MHz.

Memory
The GPU also Shares the System's RAM which varies from laptop to laptop. Typically, the GPU reserves 256MB. Depending on whether or not the system's RAM is Dual-Channeled, it can access either a 64-bit or 128-bit memory interface. The operating memory clock also depends on the at which speed the System's RAM is running and is limited by the highest operating speed that the Processor supports. It is then obvious the Memory Bandwidth depends on a lot of factors and thus this Graphics Card performance may vary heavily from system to system.

Features
DirectX 10.1 Support (10.0 Hardware Default) and support for NVIDIA PureVideo HD Technology, Dual-stream Hardware Acceleration, PhysX, CUDA, HybridPower and other technologies.

Power Consumption
With a rated board TDP of 14W, it may be used on very small notebooks.

Performance
Gaming benchmarks put its performance considerably above the desktop GeForce 210.
Overview
GeForce 310M is an Entry-Level Mobile Graphics Card based on the Second Revision of the Tesla Architecture.

Architecture
Tesla was NVIDIA's First Unified Shader Architecture.

GPU
It equips a GPU Codenamed GT218-N11M-GE1 which has 2 Stream Multiprocessors activated and thus offers 16 Shader Processing Units, 8 TMUs and 4 ROPs. The Central Unit is clocked at 625MHz.

Memory
The GPU accesses a 512MB frame buffer of DDR3, through a 64-bit memory interface. The size of the frame buffer is adequate. The Memory Clock Operates at 790MHz.

Features
DirectX 10.1 Support (10.0 Hardware Default) and support for NVIDIA PureVideo HD Technology, Dual-stream Hardware Acceleration, PhysX, CUDA, HybridPower and other technologies.

Power Consumption
With a rated board TDP of 14W, it may be used on very small notebooks.

Performance
Gaming benchmarks put its performance somewhat above the desktop GeForce 210.
Recommended CPU
Possible GPU Upgrades
N/A
N/A
GPU Variants
-
-

Title

Body