GeForce GT 220 vs Radeon R9 270

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 270 and GeForce GT 220, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 270
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
11.15
+1891%

R9 270 outperforms GT 220 by a whopping 1891% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking3911173
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.11no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)GT2xx (2009−2012)
GPU code nameCuracaoGT216
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 November 2013 (10 years ago)12 October 2009 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$179 $79.99
Current price$229 (1.3x MSRP)$121 (1.5x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 270 and GT 220 have a nearly equal value for money.

Detailed specifications

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 cores128048
CUDA coresno data48
Core clock speedno data625 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,800 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt58 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate74.009.840
Floating-point performance2,368 gflops144 gflops

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 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length210 mm6.6" (16.8 cm)
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data790 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s25.3 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortVGADVIHDMI
Multi monitor supportno data+
Eyefinity1no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
DisplayPort support+no data
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF + HDA

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration-no data
CrossFire1no data
Enduro-no data
FreeSync1no data
HD3D+no data
LiquidVR1no data
PowerTune-no data
TressFX1no data
TrueAudio+no data
ZeroCore-no data
UVD+no data
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1211.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.63.1
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
Mantle-no data
CUDAno data+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

R9 270 11.15
+1891%
GT 220 0.56

Radeon R9 270 outperforms GeForce GT 220 by 1891% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

R9 270 4306
+1884%
GT 220 217

Radeon R9 270 outperforms GeForce GT 220 by 1884% in Passmark.

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 HD400−450
+1805%
21
−1805%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Hitman 3 35−40
+1650%
2−3
−1650%
Horizon Zero Dawn 230−240
+1817%
12−14
−1817%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 130−140
+1757%
7−8
−1757%
Watch Dogs: Legion 170−180
+1789%
9−10
−1789%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Hitman 3 35−40
+1650%
2−3
−1650%
Horizon Zero Dawn 230−240
+1817%
12−14
−1817%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 130−140
+1757%
7−8
−1757%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%
Watch Dogs: Legion 170−180
+1789%
9−10
−1789%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 230−240
+1817%
12−14
−1817%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 130−140
+1757%
7−8
−1757%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%
Watch Dogs: Legion 170−180
+1789%
9−10
−1789%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80
+1775%
4−5
−1775%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Hitman 3 110−120
+1733%
6−7
−1733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+1733%
3−4
−1733%

4K
High Preset

Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 0−1
Metro Exodus 75−80
+1775%
4−5
−1775%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+1650%
2−3
−1650%

This is how R9 270 and GT 220 compete in popular games:

  • R9 270 is 1805% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.15 0.56
Recency 13 November 2013 12 October 2009
Cost $179 $79.99
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 58 Watt

The Radeon R9 270 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 220 in performance tests.


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 R9 270
Radeon R9 270
NVIDIA GeForce GT 220
GeForce GT 220

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.


4 566 votes

Rate Radeon R9 270 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 700 votes

Rate GeForce GT 220 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.