Radeon R5 (Kaveri) vs GeForce GT 220

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
210 OEM 210 PCI 315 OEM 405 OEM 505 OEM GT 220 GT 415 OEM
VS
Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge) Radeon R5 (Carrizo) Radeon R5 (Kaveri) Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 220 with Radeon R5 (Kaveri), including specs and performance data.

GT 220
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 58 Watt
0.49

R5 (Kaveri) outperforms GT 220 by a whopping 116% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GT 220 GT 220
R5 (Kaveri) R5 (Kaveri)

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12291066
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.67no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GCN 1.1 (2014)
GPU code nameGT216Kaveri
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date12 October 2009 (15 years ago)4 June 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$79.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores48256
Core clock speed625 MHz514 MHz
Boost clock speedno data626 MHz
Number of transistors486 million2410 Million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)58 Wattno data
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate9.840no data
Floating-point processing power0.1277 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs16no data

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 supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length168 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width1-slotno 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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount1 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bit64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed790 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth25.3 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsVGADVIHDMIno data
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIF + HDAno data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (FL 12_0)
Shader Model4.1no data
OpenGL3.1no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA+-

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 HD21
−114%
45−50
+114%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.81no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Valorant 27−30
−17.9%
30−35
+17.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
−58.8%
27−30
+58.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Dota 2 10−12
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Metro Exodus 0−1 2−3
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Valorant 27−30
−17.9%
30−35
+17.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Dota 2 10−12
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Valorant 27−30
−17.9%
30−35
+17.9%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 1−2
−600%
7−8
+600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
−120%
10−12
+120%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 1−2
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Valorant 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 0−1 0−1

This is how GT 220 and R5 (Kaveri) compete in popular games:

  • R5 (Kaveri) is 114% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the R5 (Kaveri) is 600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R5 (Kaveri) is ahead in 27 tests (69%)
  • there's a draw in 12 tests (31%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.49 1.06
Recency 12 October 2009 4 June 2014
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm

R5 (Kaveri) has a 116.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R5 (Kaveri) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 220 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 220 is a desktop card while Radeon R5 (Kaveri) is a notebook 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.

NVIDIA GeForce GT 220
GeForce GT 220
AMD Radeon R5 (Kaveri)
Radeon R5 (Kaveri)
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

GT 220 GeForce GT 220
vs
R5 230 Radeon R5 230
R5 (Kaveri) Radeon R5 (Kaveri)
vs
GeForce 710A GeForce 710A
GT 220 GeForce GT 220
vs
7600 GT GeForce 7600 GT
ATI HD 4570 Radeon HD 4570
vs
ATI HD 5570 HD 5570
6600 AGP GeForce 6600 AGP
vs
ATI HD 5570 HD 5570
ATI HD 5570 Radeon HD 5570
vs
GTS 250M GTS 250M
RTX 5090 D GeForce RTX 5090 D
vs
GTS 250M GTS 250M
UHD Graphics 605 UHD Graphics 605
vs
ATI Mobility HD 4650 Mobility Radeon HD 4650
ATI X800 Radeon X800
vs
GT 220 GT 220
ATI 9200 PRO Radeon 9200 PRO
vs
GT 220 GT 220
GeForce 6500 GeForce 6500
vs
GT 220 GT 220
GeForce2 GTS GeForce2 GTS
vs
GT 220 GT 220
ATI Xpress 200 IGP Radeon Xpress 200 IGP
vs
GT 220 GT 220

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.1 813 votes

Rate GeForce GT 220 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 7 votes

Rate Radeon R5 (Kaveri) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 220 or Radeon R5 (Kaveri), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.