Radeon R7 M265DX vs GeForce GT 430

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 430 with Radeon R7 M265DX, including specs and performance data.

GT 430
2010
1 GB GDDR3, 49 Watt
1.56
+20%

GT 430 outperforms R7 M265DX by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9711035
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.05no data
Power efficiency2.20no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameGF108Topaz
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date11 October 2010 (14 years ago)12 October 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$79 no data

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 cores96384
CUDA cores per GPU96no data
Core clock speed700 MHz925 MHz
Boost clock speedno data940 MHz
Number of transistors585 million1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)49 Wattno data
Maximum GPU temperature98 °Cno data
Texture fill rate11.2022.56
Floating-point processing power0.2688 TFLOPS0.7219 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs1624

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).

Bus supportPCI-E 2.0 x 16no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16IGP
Length145 mmno data
Height2.713" (6.9 cm)no data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed800 - 900 MHz (1600 - 1800 data rate)System Shared
Memory bandwidth25.6 - 28.8 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsHDMIVGA (optional)Mini HDMIDual Link DVINo outputs
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.3
OpenGL4.24.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
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 430 1.56
+20%
R7 M265DX 1.30

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 430 601
+20.7%
R7 M265DX 498

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Elden Ring 1−2 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Dota 2 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Elden Ring 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Fortnite 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
World of Tanks 30−35
+33.3%
24−27
−33.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Dota 2 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
World of Tanks 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Valorant 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Elden Ring 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+25%
12−14
−25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+25%
12−14
−25%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Valorant 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.56 1.30
Recency 11 October 2010 12 October 2014
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm

GT 430 has a 20% higher aggregate performance score.

R7 M265DX, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GT 430 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M265DX in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 430 is a desktop card while Radeon R7 M265DX is a notebook 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 430
GeForce GT 430
AMD Radeon R7 M265DX
Radeon R7 M265DX

Other comparisons

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.


3.3 1134 votes

Rate GeForce GT 430 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 29 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M265DX 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.