GeForce GT 330M vs Radeon R9 290X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 290X with GeForce GT 330M, including specs and performance data.

R9 290X
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
19.25
+3338%

R9 290X outperforms GT 330M by a whopping 3338% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking2861210
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.82no data
Power efficiency4.611.69
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameHawaiiGT216
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date24 October 2013 (11 years ago)10 January 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549 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 cores281648
Core clock speedno data625 MHz
Boost clock speed947 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,200 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate176.010.00
Floating-point processing power5.632 TFLOPS0.06528 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data182
ROPs648
TMUs17616

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 3.0PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pinNone
SLI options-+

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 amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHzUp to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth320 GB/s25.28 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 DisplayPortHDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGADisplayPort
Multi monitor supportno data+
Eyefinity+-
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
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
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 Model6.34.1
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA-+

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 290X 19.25
+3338%
GT 330M 0.56

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 290X 7425
+3338%
GT 330M 216

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

R9 290X 37284
+1303%
GT 330M 2658

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:

900p300−350
+2900%
10
−2900%
Full HD86
+406%
17
−406%
4K49
+4800%
1−2
−4800%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.38no data
4K11.20no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+975%
4−5
−975%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35 0−1
Battlefield 5 60−65
+6200%
1−2
−6200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+4400%
1−2
−4400%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+5100%
1−2
−5100%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+3900%
3−4
−3900%
Hitman 3 35−40
+640%
5−6
−640%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+745%
10−12
−745%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+6500%
1−2
−6500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+5100%
1−2
−5100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+950%
6−7
−950%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+200%
30−33
−200%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+975%
4−5
−975%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35 0−1
Battlefield 5 60−65
+6200%
1−2
−6200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+4400%
1−2
−4400%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+5100%
1−2
−5100%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+3900%
3−4
−3900%
Hitman 3 35−40
+640%
5−6
−640%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+745%
10−12
−745%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+6500%
1−2
−6500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+5100%
1−2
−5100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+950%
6−7
−950%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 137
+1270%
10−11
−1270%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+200%
30−33
−200%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+975%
4−5
−975%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+4400%
1−2
−4400%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+3900%
3−4
−3900%
Hitman 3 35−40
+640%
5−6
−640%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+745%
10−12
−745%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+950%
6−7
−950%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+190%
10−11
−190%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+200%
30−33
−200%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+5100%
1−2
−5100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+3600%
1−2
−3600%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+2800%
1−2
−2800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+3433%
3−4
−3433%
Hitman 3 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+3500%
1−2
−3500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+11300%
1−2
−11300%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+967%
3−4
−967%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16 0−1
Hitman 3 14−16 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+4850%
2−3
−4850%
Metro Exodus 20−22 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 24−27 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%

This is how R9 290X and GT 330M compete in popular games:

  • R9 290X is 2900% faster in 900p
  • R9 290X is 406% faster in 1080p
  • R9 290X is 4800% faster in 4K

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 290X is 11300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, R9 290X surpassed GT 330M in all 35 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.25 0.56
Recency 24 October 2013 10 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 23 Watt

R9 290X has a 3337.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 330M, on the other hand, has 987% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 290X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 330M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 290X is a desktop card while GeForce GT 330M 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 290X
Radeon R9 290X
NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M
GeForce GT 330M

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.


4.1 450 votes

Rate Radeon R9 290X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 115 votes

Rate GeForce GT 330M 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.