UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) vs GeForce GT 220

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 220 with UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU), including specs and performance data.

GT 220
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 58 Watt
0.57

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) outperforms GT 220 by a whopping 251% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1210890
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.6913.94
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Gen. 11 (2021)
GPU code nameGT216Gen. 11
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date12 October 2009 (15 years ago)11 January 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$79.99 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 cores4832
Core clock speed625 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data900 MHz
Number of transistors486 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)58 Watt4.8 - 10 Watt
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).

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 Bitno data
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

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12_1
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
+163%
8
−163%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.81no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Hitman 3 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−54.5%
16−18
+54.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−16.7%
35−40
+16.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Hitman 3 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−54.5%
16−18
+54.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−50%
9
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−16.7%
35−40
+16.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hitman 3 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+83.3%
6
−83.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−117%
13
+117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+233%
3
−233%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−16.7%
35−40
+16.7%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 2−3
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 1−2

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

This is how GT 220 and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) compete in popular games:

  • GT 220 is 163% faster in 1080p

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 220 is 233% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is 1000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 220 is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
  • UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is ahead in 32 tests (63%)
  • there's a draw in 17 tests (33%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.57 2.00
Recency 12 October 2009 11 January 2021
Chip lithography 40 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 58 Watt 4 Watt

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) has a 250.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 1350% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) 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 UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) 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 GT 220
GeForce GT 220
Intel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU)
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU)

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.


3.1 756 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 19 votes

Rate UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) 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.