Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
NVIDIA GeForce GT 550M vs AMD Radeon R5 M330
Price now
no data
Games supported
56%
- Interface PCIe 3.0 x8
- Core clock speed 1030
- Max video memory 4096 MB
- Memory type DDR3
- Memory clock speed 1000
- Maximum resolution
- Interface PCIe 2.0 x16
- Core clock speed 740
- Max video memory 1536 MB
- Memory type DDR3
- Memory clock speed 900 MHz
- Maximum resolution
Price now
55$
Games supported
55%
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance rating | 871 | 878 |
| Value for money | no data | 0.27 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | Fermi (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Exo Pro DDR3 | N12P-GT |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 7 May 2015 (7 years old) | 6 January 2011 (12 years old) |
| Current price | no data | $55 |
Value for money
no data
Technical specs
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 320 | 96 |
| CUDA cores | no data | 96 |
| Compute units | 5 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 1030 MHz | 740 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1030 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 690 million | 585 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Thermal design power (TDP) | 18 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 20.60 | 11.8 billion/sec |
| Floating-point performance | 659.2 gflops | 284.16 gflops |
Dimensions and compatibility
Information on Radeon R5 M330 and GeForce GT 550M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
Memory
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated VRAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1536 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | 28.8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Video outputs and ports
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 |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| AppAcceleration | - | no data |
| Enduro | - | no data |
| HD3D | + | no data |
| PowerTune | + | no data |
| DualGraphics | 1 | no data |
| TrueAudio | - | no data |
| ZeroCore | + | no data |
| Switchable graphics | 1 | no data |
| Optimus | no data | + |
API support
APIs supported, including particular versions of those APIs.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 12 API |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | Not Listed | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | + | N/A |
| Mantle | + | no data |
| CUDA | no data | + |
Benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. Note that overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range.
Overall score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. 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.
- Passmark
- 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
Passmark
This is probably the most ubiquitous benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various 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.
Benchmark coverage: 24%
Radeon R5 M330 outperforms GeForce GT 550M by 2% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 16%
Radeon R5 M330 outperforms GeForce GT 550M by 73% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.
Mining hashrates
Cryptocurrency mining performance of Radeon R5 M330 and GeForce GT 550M. Usually measured in megahashes per second.
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 58 Mh/s | 24 Mh/s |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| 900p | no data | 15 |
| Full HD | 9
−156%
| 23
+156%
|
Popular games
- Full HD
Low Preset - Full HD
Medium Preset - Full HD
High Preset - Full HD
Ultra Preset - 1440p
High Preset - 1440p
Ultra Preset - 4K
High Preset - 4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Hitman 3 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Hitman 3 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Hitman 3 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | no data |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Hitman 3 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance rating | 1.50 | 1.47 |
| Recency | 7 May 2015 | 6 January 2011 |
| Memory bus width | 64 | 128 |
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 320 | 96 |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 | 28.8 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Thermal design power (TDP) | 18 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technical City couldn't decide between
and
The differences in performance seem too small.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Competitors of Radeon R5 M330 by NVIDIA
According to our data, the closest equivalent to Radeon R5 M330 by NVIDIA is GeForce 910M, which is slower by 1% and lower by 4 positions in our rating.
Here are some closest NVIDIA rivals to Radeon R5 M330:
Competitors of GeForce GT 550M by AMD
According to our data, the closest equivalent to GeForce GT 550M by AMD is Radeon R6 (Carrizo), which is slower by 2% and lower by 6 positions in our rating.
Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce GT 550M:
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
