Radeon R3 Graphics vs GeForce GT 230

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1139not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency0.78no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameG94BBeema
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date12 October 2009 (15 years ago)28 January 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$43.99 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 cores48128
Core clock speed650 MHz267 MHz
Boost clock speedno data600 MHz
Number of transistors505 million930 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate15.604.800
Floating-point processing power0.156 TFLOPS0.1536 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs248

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 x16IGP
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 amount512 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth57.6 GB/sno data

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model4.06.3
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA1.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 12 October 2009 28 January 2015
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 15 Watt

R3 Graphics has an age advantage of 5 years, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 230 and Radeon R3 Graphics. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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
AMD Radeon R3 Graphics
Radeon R3 Graphics

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.9 64 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 696 votes

Rate Radeon R3 Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.