GeForce 9100M G vs GT 230M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GT 230M and GeForce 9100M G, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
230M outperforms 9100M G by a whopping 227% 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 | 1271 | 1463 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.72 | no data |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | no data |
| GPU code name | GT216 | MCP77MH MCP79MH |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 June 2009 (16 years ago) | 3 June 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 | 48 | 8 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 450 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 486 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 23 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 8.000 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1056 TFLOPS | no data |
| Gigaflops | 158 | no data |
| ROPs | 8 | no data |
| TMUs | 16 | no data |
| L2 Cache | 64 KB | no 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).
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | no 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 type | GDDR3 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | Up to 1 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 600 (DDR2), Up to 800 (GDDR3), Up to 1066 (GDDR3) MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 16 (DDR2), 25 (DDR3) | no 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 Connectors | Dual Link DVIVGADisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVI | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | HDA | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | 8.0 | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 10 |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | no data |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
| 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.
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
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+12%
|
24−27
−12%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 16−18
+54.5%
|
10−12
−54.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+12%
|
24−27
−12%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+12%
|
24−27
−12%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GT 230M is 200% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- GT 230M performs better in 17 tests (59%)
- there's a draw in 12 tests (41%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.49 | 0.15 |
| Recency | 15 June 2009 | 3 June 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 65 nm |
GT 230M has a 226.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 62.5% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce GT 230M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9100M G 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.
