Radeon R9 255 OEM vs GeForce GT 330M

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1210not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.69no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGT216Cape Verde
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date10 January 2010 (14 years ago)21 December 2013 (10 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 cores48512
Core clock speed625 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speedno data930 MHz
Number of transistors486 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate10.0029.76
Floating-point processing power0.06528 TFLOPS0.9523 TFLOPS
Gigaflops182no data
ROPs816
TMUs1632

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
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin
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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz1150 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.28 GB/s73.6 GB/s
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 ConnectorsHDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGADisplayPortNo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (11_1)
Shader Model4.15.1
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 10 January 2010 21 December 2013
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 65 Watt

GT 330M has 182.6% lower power consumption.

R9 255 OEM, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 330M and Radeon R9 255 OEM. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GT 330M is a notebook card while Radeon R9 255 OEM is a desktop one.


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 330M
GeForce GT 330M
AMD Radeon R9 255 OEM
Radeon R9 255 OEM

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.


3.2 115 votes

Rate GeForce GT 330M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1066 votes

Rate Radeon R9 255 OEM 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.