Radeon RX 7700 XT vs GeForce 310M

Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks

Aggregate performance score

We've compared RX 7700 XT and GeForce 310M across specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX 7700 XT outperforms GeForce 310M by ~107% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+107%

Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?

H2HBench Data Quality

Low confidence
Specifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026

Limited verified data

H2HBench Verdict

Higher catalog score: Radeon RX 7700 XT (~60%)

The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.

Reasons to consider RX 7700 XT

  • Higher catalog performance index
  • More graphics memory
  • Higher catalog value index
  • Recorded feature support: OpenCL 2.2 · FSR

Reasons to consider GeForce 310M

  • Lower stated power consumption
  • Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.2 · Not supported
Low confidence

Catalog metrics radar

Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.

H2H
Performance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
Performance
6230
Efficiency
84100
Price / performance
8454
Memory capacity
8043
Missing values are never replaced with zero or an average.Model: H2H 2026.07 fixed scale.

Graphics card ranking

Full ranking →

The ranking is recalculated automatically from catalog data.

Positions 30–35of 321
RX 7700 XT#32position in the GPU ranking
GeForce 310Mnot in TOP100position in the GPU ranking

Which should you choose?

Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.

COMMUNITY CHOICE

Radeon RX 7700 XT

86 likes

Head to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.

Overview

Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.

CategoryRX 7700 XTGeForce 310M
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
62Better
30
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
51Better
28
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
49Better
26
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
84
100Better
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
67Better
42

Specifications

The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.

SpecificationRX 7700 XTGeForce 310M
DisplayPort
HDMI
Device class
Upscaling
USB Type-C
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Thickness
Memory type
Power connector
Release date
Architecture
Compute API
Launch price
Shader units / coresBetter
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Recommended PSU
Length
Die sizeBetter
Memory cacheBetter
Transistor countBetter
Max monitors
Max resolution

Gaming FPS

Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.

The Gaming FPS section compares RX 7700 XT and GeForce 310M across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.

RX 7700 XTGeForce 310M
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

1080p High
264 FPS
150 FPS
1080p Ultra
186 FPS
106 FPS
1440p Ultra
144 FPS
57 FPS
4K Ultra
64 FPS
20 FPS
Game1080p High1080p Ultra1440p Ultra4K Ultra
Counter-Strike 2RX 7700 XT264 FPSGeForce 310M150 FPSRX 7700 XT186 FPSGeForce 310M106 FPSRX 7700 XT144 FPSGeForce 310M57 FPSRX 7700 XT64 FPSGeForce 310M20 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077RX 7700 XT171 FPSGeForce 310M97 FPSRX 7700 XT147 FPSGeForce 310M84 FPSRX 7700 XT105 FPSGeForce 310M41 FPSRX 7700 XT43 FPSGeForce 310M14 FPS
Forza Horizon 5RX 7700 XT215 FPSGeForce 310M122 FPSRX 7700 XT139 FPSGeForce 310M79 FPSRX 7700 XT130 FPSGeForce 310M51 FPSRX 7700 XT94 FPSGeForce 310M30 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyRX 7700 XT139 FPSGeForce 310M79 FPSRX 7700 XT117 FPSGeForce 310M66 FPSRX 7700 XT94 FPSGeForce 310M37 FPSRX 7700 XT44 FPSGeForce 310M14 FPS
Average FPSRX 7700 XT197 FPSGeForce 310M112 FPSRX 7700 XT147 FPSGeForce 310M84 FPSRX 7700 XT118 FPSGeForce 310M47 FPSRX 7700 XT61 FPSGeForce 310M20 FPS

H2H workload indices

Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.

IndexRX 7700 XTGeForce 310MDifference
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100623070%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100683078%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100673465%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100804360%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1008410017%

These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.

H2H AI workload indices

Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.

IndexRX 7700 XTGeForce 310MDifference
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100703664%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100693565%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100673465%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100723764%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100673465%

These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.

Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling

SpecificationsRX 7700 XTGeForce 310M
DirectX12.210.1
Vulkan1.4Not supported
OpenGL4.63.3
UpscalingFSRNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 2.2OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.2

Architecture and release

SpecificationsRX 7700 XTGeForce 310M
ArchitectureRDNA 3.0Tesla
Process node5 nmBetter40 nm
Release date20232010
Device classDesktopMobile

GPU cores, die and clocks

SpecificationsRX 7700 XTGeForce 310M
Transistor count28100 millionBetter260 million
Die size346 mm²57 mm²Better
Shader units / cores3456Better16
Base clock1700 MHzBetter606 MHz
Boost clock2544 MHzBetter606 MHz

Board size, power and compatibility

SpecificationsRX 7700 XTGeForce 310M
InterfacePCIe 4x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length267 mmOEM dependent
ThicknessDual-slotIGP
Recommended PSU550 WOEM dependent
Power connector8+8 pinNone

Display outputs and limits

SpecificationsRX 7700 XTGeForce 310M
HDMIHDMI 2.1aOEM dependent
DisplayPortDisplayPort 2.1OEM dependent
USB Type-CYesOEM dependent
Max monitors4OEM dependent
Max resolution7680 × 4320Depends on host system

Memory and compute throughput

SpecificationsRX 7700 XTGeForce 310M
VRAM12 GB GDDR6Better1 GB DDR3
Memory typeGDDR6GDDR3 / DDR3
Memory bus192 bitBetter64 bit
TFLOPS35.17Better0.049

Other comparisons

6

Reviews and questions

Explain this comparison

Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.

Device ARX 7700 XT67
Device BGeForce 310M42
What AI will explain

Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.

Evidence details

Data coverage

Verified gaming results
0
Verified synthetic results
0
Games with verified results
0
Verified community results
0
Estimated / unverified results
32
Specifications
0 / 69

Specification record updated:

Benchmarks updated:

Price record updated:

Comparison reviewed:

Calculated scores · How is this calculated?

Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.

clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)
Price evidence · View sources (4)

Verified community results

No verified community benchmarks yet.

Reviewed by

No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.

Comparison history

Show recorded changes (2)
  1. · Record updated: products
  2. · Record updated: products

Why you can trust this comparison

Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.

Report incorrect data

Owner experiences

Real builds, results, and community feedback.

Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges

Frequently asked comparison questions

Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.

01Which is better for gaming: RX 7700 XT or GeForce 310M?

RX 7700 XT has the higher overall gaming score, while RX 7700 XT offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.

02Which is better for streaming?

GeForce 310M is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.

03Which is better for Blender?

GeForce 310M is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.

04Which is better for video editing?

RX 7700 XT offers more overall performance, while RX 7700 XT offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.

05Which is better for neural networks and AI?

GeForce 310M is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.

06Which is better for 1080p?

RX 7700 XT is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.

07Which is better for 1440p?

RX 7700 XT leads in combined 1440p performance. RX 7700 XT can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.

08Which is better for 4K?

RX 7700 XT is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.

09Which is better for a quiet PC?

GeForce 310M is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.

10Which is better without replacing the power supply?

GeForce 310M is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.

11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?

Consider upgrading to RX 7700 XT if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.