GeForce MX330 vs Radeon HD 6320
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 574 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 43.79 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | Loveland | GP108 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 August 2011 (13 years ago) | 10 February 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $554.99 | no data |
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 | 80 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 508 MHz | 1531 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 600 MHz | 1594 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 450 million | 1,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 10 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.064 | 38.26 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.08128 TFLOPS | 1.224 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 16 |
| TMUs | 8 | 24 |
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).
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | System Shared | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 1502 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 48.06 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 Connectors | No outputs | 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 | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 15 August 2011 | 10 February 2020 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 10 Watt |
GeForce MX330 has an age advantage of 8 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 80% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 6320 and GeForce MX330. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
