GeForce GT 330M vs 8800M GTX

Place in the ranking	1051	1210
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.28	1.69
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	G92	GT216
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 November 2007 (17 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 cores	96	48
Core clock speed	500 MHz	625 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	486 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	23 Watt
Texture fill rate	24.00	10.00
Floating-point processing power	0.24 TFLOPS	0.06528 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	no data	182
ROPs	16	8
TMUs	48	16

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).

Laptop size	large	medium sized
Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	MXM-HE	MXM-A (3.0)
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
SLI options	+	+

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	GDDR3	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	Up to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth	51.2 GB/s	25.28 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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	HDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGADisplayPort
Multi monitor support	no data	+
HDMI	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

Power management

no data

8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	4.0	4.1
OpenGL	3.3	2.1
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	1.1	+

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.

8800M GTX 1.20
+114%

GT 330M 0.56

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.

8800M GTX 462
+114%

GT 330M 216

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

8800M GTX 3422
+28.8%

GT 330M 2658

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:

900p	21−24 +110%	10 −110%
Full HD	35−40 +106%	17 −106%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

+0%

3−4

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +27.3%	10−12 −27.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +27.3%	10−12 −27.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +27.3%	10−12 −27.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Hitman 3	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+33.3%

3−4

−33.3%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

+0%

2−3

+0%

This is how 8800M GTX and GT 330M compete in popular games:

8800M GTX is 110% faster in 900p
8800M GTX is 106% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the 8800M GTX is 400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

8800M GTX is ahead in 27 tests (77%)
there's a draw in 8 tests (23%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.20	0.56
Recency	1 November 2007	10 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	1 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	23 Watt

8800M GTX has a 114.3% higher aggregate performance score.

GT 330M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 182.6% lower power consumption.

The GeForce 8800M GTX is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 330M in performance tests.

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