GeForce GT 430 vs Radeon R7 M275DX

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 M275DX with GeForce GT 430, including specs and performance data.

R7 M275DX
2014
3.09
+116%

R7 M275DX outperforms GT 430 by a whopping 116% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8071038
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.05
Power efficiencyno data2.25
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameno dataGF108
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date4 June 2014 (11 years ago)11 October 2010 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$79

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores89696
CUDA cores per GPUno data96
Core clock speedno data700 MHz
Number of transistorsno data585 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data49 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data98 °C
Texture fill rateno data11.20
Floating-point processing powerno data0.2688 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data16
L1 Cacheno data128 KB
L2 Cacheno data128 KB

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0 x 16
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Heightno data2.713" (6.9 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data1 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data800 - 900 MHz (1600 - 1800 data rate)
Memory bandwidthno data25.6 - 28.8 GB/s
Shared memory+-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectorsno dataHDMIVGA (optional)Mini HDMIDual Link DVI
Eyefinity+-
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX1212 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.2
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R7 M275DX 3.09
+116%
GT 430 1.43

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.

R7 M275DX 1932
+168%
GT 430 720

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 HD24
+140%
10−12
−140%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data7.90

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 4−5 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Fortnite 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Valorant 45−50
+37.1%
35−40
−37.1%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 47
+46.9%
30−35
−46.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Dota 2 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Fortnite 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Valorant 45−50
+37.1%
35−40
−37.1%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Dota 2 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Valorant 45−50
+37.1%
35−40
−37.1%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+86.7%
14−16
−86.7%
Valorant 30−33
+400%
6−7
−400%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Valorant 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

This is how R7 M275DX and GT 430 compete in popular games:

  • R7 M275DX is 140% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R7 M275DX is 700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, R7 M275DX surpassed GT 430 in all 45 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.09 1.43
Recency 4 June 2014 11 October 2010
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm

R7 M275DX has a 116.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R7 M275DX is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 430 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 M275DX is a notebook graphics card while GeForce GT 430 is a desktop one.

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 R7 M275DX
Radeon R7 M275DX
NVIDIA GeForce GT 430
GeForce GT 430

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.


2.5 2 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M275DX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 1321 votes

Rate GeForce GT 430 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 M275DX or GeForce GT 430, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.