Radeon E9171 MCM vs GeForce 210

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1326not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.66no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGT218Lexa
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date12 October 2009 (15 years ago)3 October 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$29.49 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 cores16512
Core clock speed589 MHz1124 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1219 MHz
Number of transistors260 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30.5 Watt40 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate4.16039.01
Floating-point processing power0.03936 TFLOPS1.248 TFLOPS
ROPs416
TMUs832

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 supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length168 mmno data
Height2.731" (6.9 cm)no data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth8.0 GB/s96 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 ConnectorsDVIVGADisplayPortNo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model4.16.4
OpenGL3.14.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 12 October 2009 3 October 2017
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 40 Watt

GeForce 210 has 33.3% lower power consumption.

E9171 MCM, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 210 and Radeon E9171 MCM. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 210 is a desktop card while Radeon E9171 MCM 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.


NVIDIA GeForce 210
GeForce 210
AMD Radeon E9171 MCM
Radeon E9171 MCM

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.


2.6 3656 votes

Rate GeForce 210 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 2 votes

Rate Radeon E9171 MCM 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.