GeForce GT 415M vs GT 220M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GT 220M and GeForce GT 415M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
GT 415M outperforms GT 220M by an impressive 81% 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 | 1216 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.07 | 4.36 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Fermi (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | G96C | GF108 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 June 2009 (16 years ago) | 3 September 2010 (15 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 | 500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 314 million | 585 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 14 Watt | 12 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 8.000 | 4.000 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.08 TFLOPS | 0.096 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 4 |
| TMUs | 16 | 8 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 64 KB |
| L2 Cache | 32 KB | 256 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 | medium sized |
| 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 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 25.6 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) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| 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.
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
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
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
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| 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
−33.3%
|
20−22
+33.3%
|
| 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
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| 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
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| 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 GT 415M is 200% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- GT 415M performs better in 28 tests (85%)
- there's a draw in 5 tests (15%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.36 | 0.65 |
| Recency | 15 June 2009 | 3 September 2010 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 14 Watt | 12 Watt |
GT 415M has a 80.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 37.5% more advanced lithography process, and 16.7% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GT 415M 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.
