GeForce MX330 vs Radeon R9 270X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 270X with GeForce MX330, including specs and performance data.

R9 270X
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 180 Watt
12.62
+100%

R9 270X outperforms MX330 by a whopping 100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking393574
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.64no data
Power efficiency4.8743.79
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameCuracaoGP108
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)10 February 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1280384
Core clock speedno data1531 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz1594 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate84.0038.26
Floating-point processing power2.688 TFLOPS1.224 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8024

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 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2 x 6-pinNone

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 amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data
Optimus-+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA-6.1

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. 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 270X 12.62
+100%
GeForce MX330 6.30

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.

R9 270X 4869
+100%
GeForce MX330 2430

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.

R9 270X 6560
+74.4%
GeForce MX330 3762

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 HD40−45
+81.8%
22
−81.8%
4K45−50
+95.7%
23
−95.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.98no data
4K4.42no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+52.6%
19
−52.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+122%
9
−122%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+122%
18−20
−122%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+127%
11
−127%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+38.1%
21
−38.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+29.6%
27
−29.6%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+102%
40−45
−102%
Hitman 3 24−27
+50%
16
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
−78.8%
118
+78.8%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+55.6%
27
−55.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+34.6%
26
−34.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+86.4%
21−24
−86.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
−12.7%
80
+12.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+31.8%
22
−31.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+150%
8
−150%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+122%
18−20
−122%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+150%
10
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+61.1%
18
−61.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+84.2%
19
−84.2%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+102%
40−45
−102%
Hitman 3 24−27
+60%
15
−60%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
−60.6%
106
+60.6%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+100%
21
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+75%
20
−75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+86.4%
21−24
−86.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+55%
20−22
−55%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
−5.6%
75
+5.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+314%
7
−314%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+150%
8−9
−150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+525%
4
−525%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+142%
12
−142%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+419%
16
−419%
Hitman 3 24−27
+84.6%
13
−84.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+313%
16
−313%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+86.4%
21−24
−86.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+158%
12
−158%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+39.2%
50−55
−39.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+289%
9
−289%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+108%
12−14
−108%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+90%
10−11
−90%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+210%
20−22
−210%
Hitman 3 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+85.7%
14−16
−85.7%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+250%
6−7
−250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+900%
2−3
−900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+97.5%
40−45
−97.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+90.9%
10−12
−90.9%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Hitman 3 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+253%
16−18
−253%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%

This is how R9 270X and GeForce MX330 compete in popular games:

  • R9 270X is 82% faster in 1080p
  • R9 270X is 96% faster in 4K

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

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 270X is 1000% faster.
  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX330 is 79% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R9 270X is ahead in 67 tests (94%)
  • GeForce MX330 is ahead in 4 tests (6%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.62 6.30
Recency 8 October 2013 10 February 2020
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 10 Watt

R9 270X has a 100.3% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GeForce MX330, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 1700% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 270X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX330 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 270X is a desktop card while GeForce MX330 is a notebook one.


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 270X
Radeon R9 270X
NVIDIA GeForce MX330
GeForce MX330

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.


4 741 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 2161 vote

Rate GeForce MX330 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.