Radeon RX 6900 XT vs GeForce GT 330M

Place in the ranking	1218	20
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	36.06
Power efficiency	1.79	17.01
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GT216	Navi 21
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	10 January 2010 (14 years ago)	28 October 2020 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	24	5120
CUDA cores	48	no data
Core clock speed	625 MHz	1825 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2250 MHz
Number of transistors	486 million	26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	300 Watt
Texture fill rate	10.00	720.0
Floating-point processing power	0.06528 TFLOPS	23.04 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	182	no data
ROPs	8	128
TMUs	16	320
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	80

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
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	3-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	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	25.28 GB/s	512.0 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 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 compatibility

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	2.1
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
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 0.56

RX 6900 XT 69.52
+12314%

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 330M 216

RX 6900 XT 26813
+12313%

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	17 −1082%	201 +1082%
1440p	1−2 −13400%	135 +13400%
4K	0−1	83

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−4400%

130−140
+4400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −2825%	117 +2825%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −3867%	110−120 +3867%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −4400%	130−140 +4400%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −16900%	170−180 +16900%
Hitman 3	5−6 −2480%	120−130 +2480%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −2200%	250−260 +2200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −4783%	290−300 +4783%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −407%	150−160 +407%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −6875%	279 +6875%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −3867%	110−120 +3867%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −4400%	130−140 +4400%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −16900%	170−180 +16900%
Hitman 3	5−6 −2480%	120−130 +2480%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −2200%	250−260 +2200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −4783%	290−300 +4783%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −1390%	140−150 +1390%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −407%	150−160 +407%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −2350%	98 +2350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −3867%	110−120 +3867%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −4400%	130−140 +4400%
Hitman 3	5−6 −2480%	120−130 +2480%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −2473%	283 +2473%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −4783%	290−300 +4783%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −1540%	164 +1540%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −303%	121 +303%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−11000%

110−120
+11000%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	99
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −7300%	70−75 +7300%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −8100%	80−85 +8100%
Hitman 3	6−7 −1583%	100−110 +1583%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −7367%	224 +7367%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −23800%	230−240 +23800%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−3700%

110−120
+3700%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −6700%	68 +6700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	66

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−3650%

75−80
+3650%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	169 +0%	169 +0%
Battlefield 5	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%
Metro Exodus	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	142 +0%	142 +0%
Battlefield 5	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%
Metro Exodus	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	137 +0%	137 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	248 +0%	248 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

120−130

+0%

120−130

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5

160−170

+0%

160−170

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	109 +0%	109 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Metro Exodus	117 +0%	117 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Hitman 3	83 +0%	83 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	122 +0%	122 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	162 +0%	162 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	54 +0%	54 +0%

This is how GT 330M and RX 6900 XT compete in popular games:

RX 6900 XT is 11900% faster in 900p
RX 6900 XT is 1082% faster in 1080p
RX 6900 XT is 13400% faster in 1440p

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 6900 XT is 23800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 6900 XT is ahead in 35 tests (50%)
there's a draw in 35 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.56	69.52
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	300 Watt

GT 330M has 1204.3% lower power consumption.

RX 6900 XT, on the other hand, has a 12314.3% 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 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 330M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 330M is a notebook card while Radeon RX 6900 XT is a desktop one.

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