GeForce 9700M GTS vs GT 220M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GT 220M and GeForce 9700M GTS, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
9700M GTS outperforms GT 220M by an impressive 75% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1315 | 1222 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.07 | 0.84 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | G96C | G94 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 June 2009 (16 years ago) | 29 July 2008 (17 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 | 32 | 48 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 530 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 314 million | 505 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 14 Watt | 60 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 8.000 | 12.72 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.08 TFLOPS | 0.1272 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | no data | 180 |
| ROPs | 8 | 16 |
| TMUs | 16 | 24 |
| L2 Cache | 32 KB | 64 KB |
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 | no data | large |
| Interface | MXM-II | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
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 | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |
| 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | 1.1 | + |
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.
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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−7.4%
|
27−30
+7.4%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−26.7%
|
18−20
+26.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−20%
|
12−14
+20%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−7.4%
|
27−30
+7.4%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−20%
|
12−14
+20%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−7.4%
|
27−30
+7.4%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 1−2 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 1−2 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the 9700M GTS is 200% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- 9700M GTS performs better in 24 tests (73%)
- there's a draw in 9 tests (27%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.36 | 0.63 |
| Recency | 15 June 2009 | 29 July 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 14 Watt | 60 Watt |
GT 220M has an age advantage of 10 months, a 18.2% more advanced lithography process, and 328.6% lower power consumption.
9700M GTS, on the other hand, has a 75% higher aggregate performance score.
The GeForce 9700M GTS is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 220M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
