GeForce MX330 vs Radeon HD 8770M

Place in the ranking	777	575
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	Mars	GP108
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 April 2013 (11 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	384	384
Core clock speed	775 MHz	1531 MHz
Boost clock speed	825 MHz	1594 MHz
Number of transistors	950 million	1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	10 Watt
Texture fill rate	19.80	38.26
Floating-point processing power	0.6336 TFLOPS	1.224 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	16
TMUs	24	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 3.0 x8	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	2 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1125 MHz	1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth	72 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 8770M 2.99

GeForce MX330 6.31
+111%

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 8770M 1934

GeForce MX330 4834
+150%

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	54 +135%	23 −135%
4K	10−12 −120%	22 +120%

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	9−10 −111%	19 +111%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −800%	9 +800%
Battlefield 5	5−6 −260%	18−20 +260%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 −57.1%	11 +57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −250%	21 +250%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 −238%	27 +238%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −156%	40−45 +156%
Hitman 3	8−9 −100%	16 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −436%	118 +436%
Metro Exodus	3−4 −800%	27 +800%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 −271%	26 +271%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −83.3%	21−24 +83.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −105%	80 +105%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −144%	22 +144%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −700%	8 +700%
Battlefield 5	5−6 −260%	18−20 +260%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 −42.9%	10 +42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −200%	18 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 −138%	19 +138%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −156%	40−45 +156%
Hitman 3	8−9 −87.5%	15 +87.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −382%	106 +382%
Metro Exodus	3−4 −600%	21 +600%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 −186%	20 +186%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −83.3%	21−24 +83.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −42.9%	20−22 +42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −92.3%	75 +92.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +28.6%	7 −28.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −700%	8−9 +700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +75%	4 −75%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −100%	12 +100%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +0%	16 +0%
Hitman 3	8−9 −62.5%	13 +62.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +37.5%	16 −37.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −83.3%	21−24 +83.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +16.7%	12 −16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −30.8%	50−55 +30.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8

−28.6%

9
+28.6%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Hitman 3	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −75%	14−16 +75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 −122%	40−45 +122%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

−83.3%

10−12
+83.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −400%	5−6 +400%
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%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	6−7
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%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +0%	20−22 +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

Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

This is how HD 8770M and GeForce MX330 compete in popular games:

HD 8770M is 135% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX330 is 120% 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 8770M is 75% faster.
in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX330 is 800% faster.

All in all, in popular games: