UHD Graphics 750 vs GeForce GT 220

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 220 and UHD Graphics 750, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 220
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 58 Watt
0.50

Graphics 750 outperforms 220 by a whopping 684% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1266710
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.6921.04
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameGT216Rocket Lake GT1
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date12 October 2009 (15 years ago)30 March 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$79.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores48256
Core clock speed625 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1300 MHz
Number of transistors486 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)58 Watt15 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate10.0020.80
Floating-point processing power0.1306 TFLOPS0.6656 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs1616
L2 Cache64 KBno data

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 supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16Ring Bus
Length168 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed790 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth25.3 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsVGADVIHDMINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIF + HDAno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.4
OpenGL3.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

GT 220 0.50
UHD Graphics 750 3.92
+684%

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.

GT 220 222
Samples: 2211
UHD Graphics 750 1733
+681%

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 HD21
−662%
160−170
+662%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.81no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Far Cry 5 0−1 12−14
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−300%
20−22
+300%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−113%
16−18
+113%
Valorant 27−30
−100%
55−60
+100%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
−335%
70−75
+335%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Dota 2 10−12
−673%
85−90
+673%
Far Cry 5 0−1 12−14
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−300%
20−22
+300%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−113%
16−18
+113%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Valorant 27−30
−100%
55−60
+100%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Dota 2 10−12
−673%
85−90
+673%
Far Cry 5 0−1 12−14
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−300%
20−22
+300%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−113%
16−18
+113%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Valorant 27−30
−100%
55−60
+100%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3
−1500%
30−35
+1500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
−540%
30−35
+540%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Hogwarts Legacy 0−1 4−5
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 8−9

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Valorant 3−4
−600%
21−24
+600%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High

Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how GT 220 and UHD Graphics 750 compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 750 is 662% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics 750 is 1500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 750 performs better in 30 tests (59%)
  • there's a draw in 21 tests (41%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.50 3.92
Recency 12 October 2009 30 March 2021
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 58 Watt 15 Watt

UHD Graphics 750 has a 684% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 286.7% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 750 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 220 in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GT 220
GeForce GT 220
Intel UHD Graphics 750
UHD Graphics 750

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.1 847 votes

Rate GeForce GT 220 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 420 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 220 or UHD Graphics 750, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.