GeForce MX330 vs GTX 480 512

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated574
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data43.55
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGF100GP108
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)10 February 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 cores512384
Core clock speed527 MHz1531 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1594 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)375 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate33.7338.26
Floating-point processing powerno data1.224 TFLOPS
ROPs4816
TMUs6424

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length292 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed2.8 GB/s1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth134.4 GB/s48.06 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3aNo outputs
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.06.1

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 375 Watt 10 Watt

GeForce MX330 has a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 3650% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 480 Core 512 and GeForce MX330. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 480 Core 512 is a desktop card while GeForce MX330 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 GTX 480 Core 512
GeForce GTX 480 Core 512
NVIDIA GeForce MX330
GeForce MX330

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.


5 1 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 480 Core 512 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 2161 vote

Rate GeForce MX330 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.