GeForce G210M vs Radeon R5 M330

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking974not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.28no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameExoGT218
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)15 June 2009 (15 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 cores32016
CUDA coresno data16
Compute units5no data
Core clock speed955 MHz625 MHz
Boost clock speed1030 MHzno data
Number of transistors690 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt14 Watt
Texture fill rate20.605.000
Floating-point processing power0.6592 TFLOPS0.048 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data72
ROPs84
TMUs208

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GBUp to 1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHzUp to 500 (DDR2), Up to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s12.8 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 outputsDual Link DVIDisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVIVGA
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-
Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1211.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.04.1
OpenGL4.42.1
OpenCLNot Listed1.1
Vulkan+N/A
Mantle+-
CUDA-+

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.

R5 M330 595
+413%
GeForce G210M 116

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.

R5 M330 4897
+171%
GeForce G210M 1805

Pros & cons summary


Recency 5 May 2015 15 June 2009
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 14 Watt

R5 M330 has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce G210M, on the other hand, has 28.6% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R5 M330 and GeForce G210M. 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.

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 R5 M330
Radeon R5 M330
NVIDIA GeForce G210M
GeForce G210M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3 992 votes

Rate Radeon R5 M330 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 75 votes

Rate GeForce G210M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.