Radeon RX 590 vs GeForce GT 220

Place in the ranking	1210	228
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	25.26
Power efficiency	0.69	9.69
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	GT216	Polaris 30
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	12 October 2009 (15 years ago)	15 November 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$79.99	$279

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GT 220 and RX 590 have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores	48	2304
Core clock speed	625 MHz	1469 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1545 MHz
Number of transistors	486 million	5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	58 Watt	175 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	9.840	222.5
Floating-point processing power	0.1277 TFLOPS	7.119 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	32
TMUs	16	144

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 support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	168 mm	241 mm
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 8-pin

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 type	GDDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	790 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	25.3 GB/s	256.0 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 Connectors	VGADVIHDMI	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF + HDA	no data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	4.1	6.4
OpenGL	3.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
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.

GT 220 0.57

RX 590 24.34
+4170%

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.

GT 220 219

RX 590 9390
+4188%

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 HD	21 −371%	99 +371%
1440p	1−2 −5500%	56 +5500%
4K	0−1	36

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.81	2.82
1440p	79.99	4.98
4K	no data	7.75

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−1233%

40−45
+1233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −1525%	65 +1525%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −2200%	69 +2200%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −8900%	90 +8900%
Hitman 3	5−6 −880%	45−50 +880%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −2636%	301 +2636%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −2233%	140 +2233%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −807%	272 +807%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −2725%	113 +2725%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −2033%	64 +2033%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −7000%	71 +7000%
Hitman 3	5−6 −880%	45−50 +880%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −2509%	287 +2509%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −1800%	114 +1800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −430%	50−55 +430%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −770%	261 +770%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −875%	39 +875%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1433%	46 +1433%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Hitman 3	5−6 −880%	45−50 +880%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −773%	96 +773%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −1567%	100 +1567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −410%	51 +410%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −16.7%	35 +16.7%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−3600%

35−40
+3600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	24−27
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1400%	14−16 +1400%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −2700%	27−30 +2700%
Hitman 3	6−7 −383%	27−30 +383%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −2300%	72 +2300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −20200%	203 +20200%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−1333%

43
+1333%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −1800%	19 +1800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	42

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−1400%

30
+1400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	86 +0%	86 +0%
Battlefield 5	136 +0%	136 +0%
Far Cry 5	90 +0%	90 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	274 +0%	274 +0%
Metro Exodus	124 +0%	124 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	91 +0%	91 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	73 +0%	73 +0%
Battlefield 5	122 +0%	122 +0%
Far Cry 5	74 +0%	74 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	259 +0%	259 +0%
Metro Exodus	97 +0%	97 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	74 +0%	74 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	62 +0%	62 +0%
Far Cry 5	55 +0%	55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	91 +0%	91 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5

45−50

+0%

45−50

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55 +0%	55 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	38 +0%	38 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Metro Exodus	58 +0%	58 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	70 +0%	70 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	39 +0%	39 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	26 +0%	26 +0%
Hitman 3	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	57 +0%	57 +0%
Metro Exodus	36 +0%	36 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	32 +0%	32 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20 +0%	20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	17 +0%	17 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	46 +0%	46 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40 +0%	40 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	13 +0%	13 +0%

This is how GT 220 and RX 590 compete in popular games:

RX 590 is 371% faster in 1080p
RX 590 is 5500% faster in 1440p

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 590 is 20200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 590 is ahead in 35 tests (50%)
there's a draw in 35 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.57	24.34
Recency	12 October 2009	15 November 2018
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	58 Watt	175 Watt

GT 220 has 201.7% lower power consumption.

RX 590, on the other hand, has a 4170.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 590 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.