GeForce MX230 vs Radeon HD 8870M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8870M and GeForce MX230, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 8870M
2013
2 GB GDDR5
4.16

MX230 outperforms HD 8870M by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking690652
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data32.58
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameVenusGP108
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 April 2013 (11 years ago)21 February 2019 (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 cores640256
Core clock speed725 MHz1519 MHz
Boost clock speed775 MHz1582 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data10 Watt
Texture fill rate31.0025.31
Floating-point processing power0.992 TFLOPS0.81 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs4016

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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1125 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s48.06 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo 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.

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA-+

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.

HD 8870M 4.16
GeForce MX230 4.64
+11.5%

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.

HD 8870M 1638
GeForce MX230 1827
+11.5%

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 8870M 2986
GeForce MX230 3364
+12.6%

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.

HD 8870M 2169
GeForce MX230 2468
+13.8%

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.

HD 8870M 15739
GeForce MX230 15797
+0.4%

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:

900p42
−7.1%
45−50
+7.1%
Full HD33
+57.1%
21
−57.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−25%
20
+25%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−50%
15
+50%
Fortnite 21−24
−43.5%
33
+43.5%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−10.5%
21
+10.5%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−50%
24
+50%
Valorant 50−55
−7.4%
55−60
+7.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 87
+33.8%
65
−33.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Dota 2 35−40
−61.1%
58
+61.1%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−30%
13
+30%
Fortnite 21−24
+15%
20
−15%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+18.8%
16
−18.8%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
−46.2%
19
+46.2%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+75%
4
−75%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−31.3%
21
+31.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−36.4%
15
+36.4%
Valorant 50−55
−7.4%
55−60
+7.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+33.3%
12
−33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Dota 2 35−40
−19.4%
43
+19.4%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−20%
12
+20%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+58.3%
12
−58.3%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−6.3%
17
+6.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+22.2%
9
−22.2%
Valorant 50−55
−7.4%
55−60
+7.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+43.8%
16
−43.8%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−33
−13.3%
30−35
+13.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−10.3%
30−35
+10.3%
Valorant 40−45
−14%
45−50
+14%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 20−22
−10%
21−24
+10%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how HD 8870M and GeForce MX230 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce MX230 is 7% faster in 900p
  • HD 8870M is 57% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the HD 8870M is 75% faster.
  • in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GeForce MX230 is 200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD 8870M is ahead in 8 tests (13%)
  • GeForce MX230 is ahead in 46 tests (73%)
  • there's a draw in 9 tests (14%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.16 4.64
Recency 1 April 2013 21 February 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm

GeForce MX230 has a 11.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce MX230 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8870M in performance tests.

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.


AMD Radeon HD 8870M
Radeon HD 8870M
NVIDIA GeForce MX230
GeForce MX230

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.


4.7 11 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8870M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 1412 votes

Rate GeForce MX230 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 8870M or GeForce MX230, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.