RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile vs GeForce MX330

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX330 with RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GeForce MX330
2020
2 GB GDDR5, 10 Watt
6.29

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms MX330 by a whopping 843% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking57634
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency43.7827.52
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGP108no data
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date10 February 2020 (4 years ago)21 March 2023 (1 year 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 cores3847424
Core clock speed1531 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1594 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt150 Watt (60 - 150 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate38.26no data
Floating-point processing power1.224 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs24no 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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB12 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz16000 MHz
Memory bandwidth48.06 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

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 (12_1)12 Ultimate
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131-
CUDA6.1-

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 MX330 6.29
RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 59.30
+843%

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 MX330 2427
RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 22878
+843%

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 HD22
−809%
200−210
+809%
4K24
−817%
220−230
+817%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−800%
90−95
+800%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 19
−795%
170−180
+795%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9
−789%
80−85
+789%
Battlefield 5 18−20
−789%
160−170
+789%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 11
−809%
100−105
+809%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−800%
90−95
+800%
Far Cry 5 21
−805%
190−200
+805%
Far Cry New Dawn 27
−826%
250−260
+826%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−754%
350−400
+754%
Hitman 3 16
−838%
150−160
+838%
Horizon Zero Dawn 118
−832%
1100−1150
+832%
Metro Exodus 27
−826%
250−260
+826%
Red Dead Redemption 2 26
−823%
240−250
+823%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
−809%
200−210
+809%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80
−838%
750−800
+838%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 22
−809%
200−210
+809%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8
−838%
75−80
+838%
Battlefield 5 18−20
−789%
160−170
+789%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10
−800%
90−95
+800%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−800%
90−95
+800%
Far Cry 5 18
−789%
160−170
+789%
Far Cry New Dawn 19
−795%
170−180
+795%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−754%
350−400
+754%
Hitman 3 15
−833%
140−150
+833%
Horizon Zero Dawn 106
−796%
950−1000
+796%
Metro Exodus 21
−805%
190−200
+805%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20
−800%
180−190
+800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
−809%
200−210
+809%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
−800%
180−190
+800%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75
−833%
700−750
+833%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7
−829%
65−70
+829%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
−838%
75−80
+838%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4
−775%
35−40
+775%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−800%
90−95
+800%
Far Cry 5 12
−817%
110−120
+817%
Forza Horizon 4 16
−838%
150−160
+838%
Hitman 3 13
−823%
120−130
+823%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16
−838%
150−160
+838%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
−809%
200−210
+809%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
−817%
110−120
+817%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
−782%
450−500
+782%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9
−789%
80−85
+789%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
−817%
110−120
+817%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
−800%
90−95
+800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−817%
55−60
+817%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−817%
55−60
+817%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−800%
27−30
+800%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−829%
65−70
+829%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−800%
180−190
+800%
Hitman 3 10−11
−800%
90−95
+800%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−829%
130−140
+829%
Metro Exodus 6−7
−817%
55−60
+817%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−800%
45−50
+800%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−775%
350−400
+775%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−809%
100−105
+809%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
−800%
45−50
+800%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Hitman 3 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−841%
160−170
+841%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−800%
27−30
+800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−800%
27−30
+800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−800%
27−30
+800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−800%
27−30
+800%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
−800%
27−30
+800%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−817%
55−60
+817%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−829%
65−70
+829%

This is how GeForce MX330 and RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile is 809% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile is 817% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.29 59.30
Recency 10 February 2020 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 150 Watt

GeForce MX330 has 1400% lower power consumption.

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has a 842.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX330 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX330 is a notebook graphics card while RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation 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 MX330
GeForce MX330
NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile

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.


3.7 2178 votes

Rate GeForce MX330 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 20 votes

Rate RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 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.