Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile vs GeForce GT 230M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 230M with Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GT 230M
2009
Up to 1 GB GDDR3, 23 Watt
0.52

RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms 230M by a whopping 4492% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1278261
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.7623.22
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGT216TU106
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date15 June 2009 (16 years ago)27 May 2019 (6 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 cores482304
Core clock speed500 MHz945 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1380 MHz
Number of transistors486 million10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rate8.000198.7
Floating-point processing power0.1056 TFLOPS6.359 TFLOPS
Gigaflops158no data
ROPs864
TMUs16144
Tensor Coresno data288
Ray Tracing Coresno data36
L1 Cacheno data2.3 MB
L2 Cache64 KB4 MB

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amountUp to 1 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 600 (DDR2), Up to 800 (GDDR3), Up to 1066 (GDDR3) MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth16 (DDR2), 25 (DDR3)448.0 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVIVGADisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVINo outputs
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC support-+
Audio input for HDMIHDAno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power management8.0no data
VR Readyno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.5
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA+7.5
DLSS-+

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 230M 0.52
RTX 3000 Mobile 23.88
+4492%

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 230M 221
Samples: 505
RTX 3000 Mobile 10116
+4477%

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.

GT 230M 2363
RTX 3000 Mobile 50309
+2029%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD2−3
−4650%
95
+4650%
4K1−2
−8700%
88
+8700%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−5300%
50−55
+5300%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−5300%
50−55
+5300%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−2350%
95−100
+2350%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−1113%
95−100
+1113%
Valorant 27−30
−526%
160−170
+526%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
−1429%
260−270
+1429%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−5300%
50−55
+5300%
Dota 2 10−12
−1100%
132
+1100%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−2350%
95−100
+2350%
Metro Exodus 0−1 55−60
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−1113%
95−100
+1113%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−2080%
109
+2080%
Valorant 27−30
−526%
160−170
+526%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−5300%
50−55
+5300%
Dota 2 10−12
−1000%
121
+1000%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−2350%
95−100
+2350%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−1113%
95−100
+1113%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−1020%
56
+1020%
Valorant 27−30
−526%
160−170
+526%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−1667%
50−55
+1667%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3
−8650%
170−180
+8650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−2817%
170−180
+2817%

1440p
Ultra

Escape from Tarkov 2−3
−2700%
55−60
+2700%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−3050%
60−65
+3050%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 55−60

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−236%
45−50
+236%
Valorant 3−4
−4733%
140−150
+4733%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−1200%
24−27
+1200%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−1250%
27−30
+1250%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
High

Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 88
+0%
88
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

This is how GT 230M and RTX 3000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 4650% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 8700% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 3000 Mobile is 8650% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 3000 Mobile performs better in 28 tests (45%)
  • there's a draw in 34 tests (55%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.52 23.88
Recency 15 June 2009 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 80 Watt

GT 230M has 247.8% lower power consumption.

RTX 3000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 4492.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 230M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 230M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is a mobile workstation 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 230M
GeForce GT 230M
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile
Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

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.


3.3 29 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 416 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 230M or Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.