Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs GeForce GT 330M

Place in the ranking	1222	535
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.67	18.59
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code name	GT216	Tiger Lake Xe
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	10 January 2010 (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 cores	48	80
Core clock speed	625 MHz	400 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1350 MHz
Number of transistors	486 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	28 Watt
Texture fill rate	10.00	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.06528 TFLOPS	no data
Gigaflops	182	no data
ROPs	8	no data
TMUs	16	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	MXM-A (3.0)	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data
SLI options	+	-

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	1 GB	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	Up to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	25.28 GB/s	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 Connectors	HDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGADisplayPort	no data
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	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
Quick Sync	no data	+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12_1
Shader Model	4.1	no data
OpenGL	2.1	no data
OpenCL	1.1	no data
Vulkan	N/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 330M 0.52

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 7.06
+1258%

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 330M 2658

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 21729
+718%

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:

900p	10 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Full HD	17 −11.8%	19 +11.8%
1440p	0−1	10
4K	1−2 −1400%	15 +1400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −57.1%	11 +57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −367%	14 +367%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −71.4%	12 +71.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −300%	12 +300%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −400%	30 +400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −320%	21−24 +320%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −42.9%	10 +42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −66.7%	5 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	8−9 −225%	26 +225%
Fortnite	0−1	45−50
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −300%	24 +300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 −663%	60−65 +663%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −20%	6 +20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −360%	21−24 +360%
World of Tanks	16−18 −576%	110−120 +576%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −28.6%	9 +28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −33.3%	4 +33.3%
Far Cry 5	8−9 −313%	30−35 +313%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −233%	20 +233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8−9 −663%	60−65 +663%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	3−4 −1200%	35−40 +1200%
World of Tanks	1−2 −5400%	55−60 +5400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −300%	16−18 +300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −150%	10 +150%
Valorant	5−6 −280%	18−20 +280%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	1−2 −2100%	21−24 +2100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	6−7
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	14−16 −6.7%	16 +6.7%
Valorant	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	14 +0%	14 +0%
Metro Exodus	27 +0%	27 +0%
Valorant	18 +0%	18 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Dota 2	22 +0%	22 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	13 +0%	13 +0%
Metro Exodus	17 +0%	17 +0%
Valorant	14 +0%	14 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Dota 2	36 +0%	36 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	9 +0%	9 +0%
Valorant	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	6 +0%	6 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	6 +0%	6 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	16 +0%	16 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Fortnite	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

This is how GT 330M and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 1200% faster in 900p
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 12% faster in 1080p
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 1400% faster in 4K

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

in World of Tanks, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is 5400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is ahead in 31 test (51%)
there's a draw in 30 tests (49%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.52	7.06
Recency	10 January 2010	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	40 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	28 Watt

GT 330M has 21.7% lower power consumption.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, on the other hand, has a 1257.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 330M in performance tests.

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