Radeon RX 6900 vs GeForce GT 330M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GT 330M with Radeon RX 6900, including specs and performance data.
RX 6900 outperforms 330M by a whopping 12035% 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 | 1277 | 38 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.75 | 19.16 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | GT216 | Navi 21 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 10 January 2010 (15 years ago) | 28 October 2020 (5 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 | 4608 |
| Core clock speed | 625 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2105 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 486 million | 23,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 23 Watt | 255 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 10.00 | 606.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.06528 TFLOPS | 19.4 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | 182 | no data |
| ROPs | 8 | 64 |
| TMUs | 16 | 288 |
| 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 | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 2x 8-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 type | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz | 16 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.28 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 | HDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGADisplayPort | 1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
| 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 |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
| 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.
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
−11900%
| 1200−1250
+11900%
|
| Full HD | 18
−11844%
| 2150−2200
+11844%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−11900%
|
120−130
+11900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−11900%
|
600−650
+11900%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−11900%
|
120−130
+11900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−11900%
|
600−650
+11900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−11900%
|
600−650
+11900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−11775%
|
950−1000
+11775%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−11937%
|
3250−3300
+11937%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 16−18
−11959%
|
2050−2100
+11959%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−11900%
|
120−130
+11900%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−12
−11718%
|
1300−1350
+11718%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−11900%
|
600−650
+11900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−11900%
|
600−650
+11900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−11775%
|
950−1000
+11775%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−11900%
|
600−650
+11900%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−11937%
|
3250−3300
+11937%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−11900%
|
120−130
+11900%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−12
−11718%
|
1300−1350
+11718%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−11900%
|
600−650
+11900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−11900%
|
600−650
+11900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−11775%
|
950−1000
+11775%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−11900%
|
600−650
+11900%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−11937%
|
3250−3300
+11937%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−11567%
|
350−400
+11567%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 2−3
−11900%
|
240−250
+11900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
−11567%
|
700−750
+11567%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−11900%
|
240−250
+11900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−11900%
|
120−130
+11900%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−11686%
|
1650−1700
+11686%
|
| Valorant | 3−4
−11567%
|
350−400
+11567%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−11900%
|
240−250
+11900%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−11900%
|
240−250
+11900%
|
This is how GT 330M and RX 6900 compete in popular games:
- RX 6900 is 11900% faster in 900p
- RX 6900 is 11844% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.52 | 63.10 |
| Recency | 10 January 2010 | 28 October 2020 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 16 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 23 Watt | 255 Watt |
GT 330M has 1008.7% lower power consumption.
RX 6900, on the other hand, has a 12034.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 6900 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 330M in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GT 330M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX 6900 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
