GeForce MX330 vs 615

Place in performance ranking	1029	574
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	GF108	N17S-LP / N17S-G3
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	15 May 2012 (12 years ago)	20 February 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	48	384
Core clock speed	660 MHz	1531 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1594 MHz
Number of transistors	585 million	1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	49 Watt	25 Watt (12 - 25 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate	5.280	38.26
Floating-point performance	0.1267 gflops	1.224 gflops

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 3.0 x16
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1800 MHz	7000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	28.8 GB/s	48.06 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

No outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	2.1	6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

GeForce 615 1.33

GeForce MX330 6.31
+374%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

GeForce 615 514

GeForce MX330 2434
+374%

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.

GeForce 615 1322

GeForce MX330 10899
+724%

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	4−5 −475%	23 +475%
4K	4−5 −475%	23 +475%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−11

+0%

10−11

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	19 +0%	19 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9 +0%	9 +0%
Battlefield 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	11 +0%	11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Far Cry 5	21 +0%	21 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	27 +0%	27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Hitman 3	16 +0%	16 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	118 +0%	118 +0%
Metro Exodus	27 +0%	27 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	26 +0%	26 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	80 +0%	80 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	22 +0%	22 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8 +0%	8 +0%
Battlefield 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10 +0%	10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Far Cry 5	18 +0%	18 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	19 +0%	19 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Hitman 3	15 +0%	15 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	106 +0%	106 +0%
Metro Exodus	21 +0%	21 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20 +0%	20 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	75 +0%	75 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7 +0%	7 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4 +0%	4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Far Cry 5	12 +0%	12 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	16 +0%	16 +0%
Hitman 3	13 +0%	13 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16 +0%	16 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12 +0%	12 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Hitman 3	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12

+0%

10−12

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hitman 3	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8

+0%

7−8

+0%

This is how GeForce 615 and GeForce MX330 compete in popular games:

GeForce MX330 is 475% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX330 is 475% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 71 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.33	6.31
Recency	15 May 2012	20 February 2020
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	49 Watt	25 Watt

GeForce MX330 has a 374.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 96% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX330 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 615 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 615 is a desktop card while GeForce MX330 is a notebook one.

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