GeForce 7000M vs GT 230

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 230 with GeForce 7000M, including specs and performance data.

GT 230
2009, $44
512 MB GDDR3, 75 Watt
0.77
+2467%

GT 230 outperforms 7000M by a whopping 2467% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12171557
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency0.79no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)no data
GPU code nameG94BC67
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date12 October 2009 (16 years ago)1 February 2006 (20 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$43.99 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 cores483
Core clock speed650 MHz1 MHz
Boost clock speedno data350 MHz
Number of transistors505 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Wattno data
Texture fill rate15.60no data
Floating-point processing power0.156 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs24no data
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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Width1-slotno data
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 typeGDDR3shared Memory
Maximum RAM amount512 MBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed900 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth57.6 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)shared Memory
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA1.1-

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.

GT 230 0.77
+2467%
GeForce 7000M 0.03

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 230 323
+2385%
Samples: 264
GeForce 7000M 13
Samples: 2

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

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 0−1 0−1

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 24 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.77 0.03
Recency 12 October 2009 1 February 2006
Chip lithography 55 nm 90 nm

GT 230 has a 2466.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 63.6% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GT 230 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 7000M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 230 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce 7000M is a notebook one.

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 230
GeForce GT 230
NVIDIA GeForce 7000M
GeForce 7000M

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.


3.2 77 votes

Rate GeForce GT 230 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 23 votes

Rate GeForce 7000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 230 or GeForce 7000M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.