GeForce MX330 vs ATI Radeon 7000

#ad 
Buy
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1551597
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data42.87
ArchitectureRage 6 (2000−2007)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameRV100GP108
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date19 February 2001 (24 years ago)10 February 2020 (5 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 coresno data384
Core clock speed183 MHz1531 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1594 MHz
Number of transistors30 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology180 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate0.5538.26
Floating-point processing powerno data1.224 TFLOPS
ROPs116
TMUs324

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).

InterfaceAGP 4xPCIe 3.0 x16
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDRGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount32 MB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed183 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth2.928 GB/s48.06 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX7.012 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGL1.34.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA-6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

ATI 7000 2
GeForce MX330 2416
+120700%

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 HDno data22
4Kno data23

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 29
+0%
29
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Fortnite 63
+0%
63
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 31
+0%
31
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 118
+0%
118
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 70
+0%
70
+0%
Far Cry 5 15
+0%
15
+0%
Fortnite 34
+0%
34
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 22
+0%
22
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 11
+0%
11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%
Valorant 106
+0%
106
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 19
+0%
19
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 64
+0%
64
+0%
Far Cry 5 14
+0%
14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+0%
16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+0%
12
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21
+0%
21
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Valorant 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 24
+0%
24
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Recency 19 February 2001 10 February 2020
Maximum RAM amount 32 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 180 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 10 Watt

GeForce MX330 has an age advantage of 18 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 1185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 130% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon 7000 and GeForce MX330. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon 7000 is a desktop card while GeForce MX330 is a notebook one.

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.


ATI Radeon 7000
Radeon 7000
NVIDIA GeForce MX330
GeForce MX330

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.


4.1 196 votes

Rate Radeon 7000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 2250 votes

Rate GeForce MX330 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon 7000 or GeForce MX330, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.