UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs vs GeForce GT 230M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GT 230M GT 240M GT 325M GT 330M GT 330M Mac Edition
VS
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 230M and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 230M
2009
Up to 1 GB GDDR3, 23 Watt
0.56

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs outperforms GT 230M by a whopping 716% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GT 230M GT 230M
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1216657
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.6811.24
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGT216Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 June 2009 (15 years ago)15 August 2020 (4 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 cores4848
Core clock speed500 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1450 MHz
Number of transistors486 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate8.000no data
Floating-point processing power0.1056 TFLOPSno data
Gigaflops158no data
ROPs8no data
TMUs16no 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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no 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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amountUp to 1 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speedUp to 600 (DDR2), Up to 800 (GDDR3), Up to 1066 (GDDR3) MHzno data
Memory bandwidth16 (DDR2), 25 (DDR3)no data
Shared memory-+

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 ConnectorsDual Link DVIVGADisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVIno data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
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
Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12_1
Shader Model4.1no data
OpenGL2.1no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GT 230M 0.56
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 4.57
+716%

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
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 10650
+351%

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
−800%
18
+800%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−450%
11
+450%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−250%
21
+250%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−214%
22
+214%
Fortnite 0−1 27−30
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−183%
17
+183%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−388%
35−40
+388%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−200%
14−16
+200%
World of Tanks 16−18
−47.1%
25
+47.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−100%
14
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−167%
16
+167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−388%
35−40
+388%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−933%
30−35
+933%
World of Tanks 1−2
−3200%
30−35
+3200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Valorant 5−6
−160%
12−14
+160%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−1200%
12−14
+1200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 4−5
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Valorant 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%

Full HD
Low Preset

Elden Ring 13
+0%
13
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 17
+0%
17
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 15
+0%
15
+0%
Elden Ring 10
+0%
10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
+0%
10
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 12
+0%
12
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 24
+0%
24
+0%
Valorant 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Elden Ring 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Elden Ring 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how GT 230M and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 800% faster in 1080p

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

  • in World of Tanks, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 3200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is ahead in 31 test (53%)
  • there's a draw in 27 tests (47%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.56 4.57
Recency 15 June 2009 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 40 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 28 Watt

GT 230M has 21.7% lower power consumption.

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, on the other hand, has a 716.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 230M in performance tests.

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 230M
GeForce GT 230M
Intel UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

GT 230M GeForce GT 230M
vs
GT 330M GeForce GT 330M
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs
vs
Iris Plus Graphics 650 Iris Plus Graphics 650
GT 230M GeForce GT 230M
vs
HD 8250 Radeon HD 8250
R7 M380 Radeon R7 M380
vs
GTX 550 Ti GeForce GTX 550 Ti
ATI Mobility HD 4850 Mobility Radeon HD 4850
vs
GT 630 GeForce GT 630
GT 435M GeForce GT 435M
vs
HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)
GT 425M GeForce GT 425M
vs
GT 1030 GK107 GeForce GT 1030 GK107
Go 7950 GTX GeForce Go 7950 GTX
vs
RX 6950 XT Radeon RX 6950 XT
9600M GT GeForce 9600M GT
vs
Iris Pro Graphics P6300 Iris Pro Graphics P6300
ATI Mobility HD 3650 Mobility Radeon HD 3650
vs
ATI X1300 XT Radeon X1300 XT
ATI Mobility HD 5145 Mobility Radeon HD 5145
vs
HD Graphics 12EU Mobile HD Graphics 12EU Mobile
ATI Mobility HD 5145 Mobility Radeon HD 5145
vs
HD Graphics 12EU HD Graphics 12EU
ATI Mobility HD 4570 Mobility Radeon HD 4570
vs
HD Graphics 12EU HD Graphics 12EU

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.3 26 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 480 votes

Rate UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 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.