A10G vs GeForce MX230

Place in the ranking	640	66
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	33.11	22.55
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GP108	GA102
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	21 February 2019 (5 years ago)	12 April 2021 (3 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	256	9216
Core clock speed	1519 MHz	1320 MHz
Boost clock speed	1582 MHz	1710 MHz
Number of transistors	1,800 million	28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	150 Watt
Texture fill rate	25.31	492.5
Floating-point processing power	0.81 TFLOPS	31.52 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	96
TMUs	16	288
Tensor Cores	no data	288
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	72

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
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	8-pin EPS

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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	12 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	1502 MHz	1563 MHz
Memory bandwidth	48.06 GB/s	600.2 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

No outputs

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.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2
CUDA	+	8.6

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.

GeForce MX230 4.75

A10G 48.53
+922%

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.

GeForce MX230 1834

A10G 18723
+921%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GeForce MX230 6554

A10G 165608
+2427%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

GeForce MX230 7113

A10G 143546
+1918%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

GeForce MX230 6604

A10G 187763
+2743%

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:

Full HD

−900%

200−210
+900%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

8−9

−900%

80−85
+900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	13 −900%	130−140 +900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 −900%	50−55 +900%
Battlefield 5	19 −900%	190−200 +900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14 −900%	140−150 +900%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −900%	80−85 +900%
Far Cry 5	14 −900%	140−150 +900%
Far Cry New Dawn	17 −900%	170−180 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	59 −917%	600−650 +917%
Hitman 3	10−11 −900%	100−105 +900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 −868%	300−310 +868%
Metro Exodus	18 −900%	180−190 +900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −900%	130−140 +900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	23 −900%	230−240 +900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 −900%	450−500 +900%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16 −900%	160−170 +900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 −900%	50−55 +900%
Battlefield 5	13 −900%	130−140 +900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	13 −900%	130−140 +900%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −900%	80−85 +900%
Far Cry 5	12 −900%	120−130 +900%
Far Cry New Dawn	12 −900%	120−130 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	53 −843%	500−550 +843%
Hitman 3	10−11 −900%	100−105 +900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 −868%	300−310 +868%
Metro Exodus	13 −900%	130−140 +900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −900%	130−140 +900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −900%	170−180 +900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −900%	170−180 +900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 −900%	450−500 +900%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6 −900%	60−65 +900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 −900%	50−55 +900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9 −900%	90−95 +900%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −900%	80−85 +900%
Far Cry 5	7 −900%	70−75 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	12 −900%	120−130 +900%
Hitman 3	10−11 −900%	100−105 +900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 −868%	300−310 +868%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −900%	170−180 +900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9 −900%	90−95 +900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 −900%	450−500 +900%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14

−900%

130−140
+900%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 −900%	90−95 +900%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 −900%	70−75 +900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −900%	50−55 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 −900%	100−105 +900%
Hitman 3	9−10 −900%	90−95 +900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −900%	110−120 +900%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −900%	300−310 +900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10

−900%

90−95
+900%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%
Hitman 3	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 −900%	50−55 +900%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

−900%

50−55
+900%

This is how GeForce MX230 and A10G compete in popular games:

A10G is 900% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.75	48.53
Recency	21 February 2019	12 April 2021
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	12 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	150 Watt

GeForce MX230 has 1400% lower power consumption.

A10G, on the other hand, has a 921.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The A10G is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX230 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX230 is a notebook card while A10G is a workstation one.

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