GeForce MX330 vs 9800 GTX

Place in the ranking	899	583
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.09	no data
Power efficiency	0.98	43.44
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	G92	GP108
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	28 March 2008 (16 years ago)	10 February 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$299	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	128	384
Core clock speed	675 MHz	1531 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1594 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	140 Watt	10 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	43.20	38.26
Floating-point processing power	0.4321 TFLOPS	1.224 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	64	24

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 support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	267 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1100 MHz	1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth	70.4 GB/s	48.06 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	HDTVDual Link DVI	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	Via Adapter	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no data

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	4.0	6.4
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	+	6.1

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.

9800 GTX 1.92

GeForce MX330 6.07
+216%

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.

9800 GTX 769

GeForce MX330 2425
+215%

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	7−8 −229%	23 +229%
4K	7−8 −243%	24 +243%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	42.71	no data
4K	42.71	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	24 +0%	24 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5 +0%	5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Metro Exodus	24 +0%	24 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	26 +0%	26 +0%
Valorant	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3 +0%	3 +0%
Dota 2	23 +0%	23 +0%
Far Cry 5	44 +0%	44 +0%
Fortnite	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Metro Exodus	11 +0%	11 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	53 +0%	53 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Valorant	15 +0%	15 +0%
World of Tanks	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	11 +0%	11 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3 +0%	3 +0%
Dota 2	64 +0%	64 +0%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Valorant	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
World of Tanks	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Metro Exodus	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Valorant	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	24 +0%	24 +0%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Fortnite	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Valorant	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%

This is how 9800 GTX and GeForce MX330 compete in popular games:

GeForce MX330 is 229% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX330 is 243% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.92	6.07
Recency	28 March 2008	10 February 2020
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	2 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	140 Watt	10 Watt

GeForce MX330 has a 216.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 1300% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX330 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9800 GTX in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 9800 GTX 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.