GeForce MX330 vs Radeon HD 7770M

Place in the ranking	729	577
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	7.33	43.23
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	Chelsea	GP108
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	24 April 2012 (12 years ago)	10 February 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 cores	512	384
Core clock speed	675 MHz	1531 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1594 MHz
Number of transistors	1,500 million	1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	32 Watt	10 Watt
Texture fill rate	21.60	38.26
Floating-point processing power	0.6912 TFLOPS	1.224 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	32	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).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1000 MHz	1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth	64 GB/s	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

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 (11_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	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.

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.

HD 7770M 3.42

GeForce MX330 6.30
+84.2%

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.

HD 7770M 2110

GeForce MX330 4834
+129%

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	10−12 −120%	22 +120%
4K	12−14 −100%	24 +100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7

−66.7%

10−11
+66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 −90%	19 +90%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −350%	9 +350%
Battlefield 5	7−8 −157%	18−20 +157%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 −37.5%	11 +37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −200%	21 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 −170%	27 +170%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −105%	40−45 +105%
Hitman 3	9−10 −77.8%	16 +77.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 −372%	118 +372%
Metro Exodus	6−7 −350%	27 +350%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 −189%	26 +189%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 −57.1%	21−24 +57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −95.1%	80 +95.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 −120%	22 +120%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −300%	8 +300%
Battlefield 5	7−8 −157%	18−20 +157%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 −25%	10 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −157%	18 +157%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 −90%	19 +90%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −105%	40−45 +105%
Hitman 3	9−10 −66.7%	15 +66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 −324%	106 +324%
Metro Exodus	6−7 −250%	21 +250%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 −122%	20 +122%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 −57.1%	21−24 +57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −33.3%	20−22 +33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −82.9%	75 +82.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +42.9%	7 −42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +100%	4 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −71.4%	12 +71.4%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +25%	16 −25%
Hitman 3	9−10 −44.4%	13 +44.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 +56.3%	16 −56.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 −57.1%	21−24 +57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +25%	12 −25%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −24.4%	50−55 +24.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −100%	12−14 +100%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −1900%	20−22 +1900%
Hitman 3	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −75%	14−16 +75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	21−24 −90.5%	40−45 +90.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8

−57.1%

10−12
+57.1%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−75%

7−8
+75%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

1−2

+0%

1−2

+0%

This is how HD 7770M and GeForce MX330 compete in popular games:

GeForce MX330 is 120% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX330 is 100% faster in 4K

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

in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD 7770M is 100% faster.
in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GeForce MX330 is 1900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD 7770M is ahead in 5 tests (7%)
GeForce MX330 is ahead in 57 tests (80%)
there's a draw in 9 tests (13%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.42	6.30
Recency	24 April 2012	10 February 2020
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	32 Watt	10 Watt

GeForce MX330 has a 84.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 220% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX330 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7770M in performance tests.

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