UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs vs GeForce MX330

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX330 and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce MX330
2020
2 GB GDDR5, 10 Watt
6.07
+38%

MX330 outperforms UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs by a substantial 38% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking583658
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency43.4411.25
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGP108Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date10 February 2020 (4 years ago)15 August 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 cores38448
Core clock speed1531 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speed1594 MHz1450 MHz
Number of transistors1,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt28 Watt
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).

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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width64 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1502 MHzno data
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+-
Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12_1
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 6.07
+38%
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 4.40

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GeForce MX330 4834
+37.7%
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 3510

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GeForce MX330 3762
+62.1%
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 2321

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GeForce MX330 20729
+29.6%
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 15992

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GeForce MX330 243721
+150%
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 97416

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

GeForce MX330 1160
+45.4%
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 798

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 HD23
+35.3%
17
−35.3%
4K24
+50%
16−18
−50%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+18.2%
11
−18.2%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 24
+84.6%
12−14
−84.6%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
−100%
10−11
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+23.8%
21
−23.8%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Metro Exodus 24
+118%
10−12
−118%
Red Dead Redemption 2 26
+85.7%
14−16
−85.7%
Valorant 21−24
+23.5%
17
−23.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
−233%
10−11
+233%
Dota 2 23
+53.3%
15
−53.3%
Far Cry 5 44
+100%
22
−100%
Fortnite 35−40
+37%
27−30
−37%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+52.9%
17
−52.9%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+120%
10
−120%
Metro Exodus 11
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 53
+35.9%
35−40
−35.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+33.3%
14−16
−33.3%
Valorant 15
+25%
12
−25%
World of Tanks 95−100
+296%
25
−296%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 11
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
−233%
10−11
+233%
Dota 2 64
+167%
24
−167%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+107%
14
−107%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+62.5%
16
−62.5%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+33.3%
35−40
−33.3%
Valorant 21−24
+75%
12−14
−75%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+19.4%
30−35
−19.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
World of Tanks 45−50
+39.4%
30−35
−39.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Valorant 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Dota 2 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+38.5%
12−14
−38.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 24
+50%
16−18
−50%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Fortnite 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Valorant 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

This is how GeForce MX330 and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs compete in popular games:

  • GeForce MX330 is 35% faster in 1080p
  • GeForce MX330 is 50% faster in 4K

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GeForce MX330 is 300% faster.
  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 233% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GeForce MX330 is ahead in 57 tests (90%)
  • UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is ahead in 4 tests (6%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.07 4.40
Recency 10 February 2020 15 August 2020
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 28 Watt

GeForce MX330 has a 38% higher aggregate performance score, and 180% lower power consumption.

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 months, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce MX330 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs in performance tests.


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
Intel UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs

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.


3.6 2227 votes

Rate GeForce MX330 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 481 vote

Rate UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 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.