Radeon RX Vega M vs GeForce GT 220M

Place in the ranking	1317	319
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.52	78.01
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code name	G96C	Vega
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	15 June 2009 (15 years ago)	1 February 2018 (6 years ago)

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	32	512
Core clock speed	500 MHz	720 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1190 MHz
Number of transistors	314 million	4,500 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	14 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	8.000	38.08
Floating-point processing power	0.08 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	8	8
TMUs	16	32

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).

Interface	MXM-II	IGP
Width	no data	IGP

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	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	System Shared
Memory bus width	128 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	25.6 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	-	no data

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

No outputs

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12.0
Shader Model	4.0	5.0
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
Vulkan	N/A	-
CUDA	1.1	-

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 220M 0.31

RX Vega M 17.06
+5403%

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 220M 121

RX Vega M 6572
+5331%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

2−3
−5400%

110−120

+5400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −5233%	160−170 +5233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%
Hitman 3	4−5 −5400%	220−230 +5400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −4900%	400−450 +4900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −5400%	220−230 +5400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −5257%	1500−1550 +5257%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −5233%	160−170 +5233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%
Hitman 3	4−5 −5400%	220−230 +5400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −4900%	400−450 +4900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −5400%	220−230 +5400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −4900%	450−500 +4900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −5257%	1500−1550 +5257%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −5233%	160−170 +5233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%
Hitman 3	4−5 −5400%	220−230 +5400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −4900%	400−450 +4900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −5400%	220−230 +5400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −4900%	450−500 +4900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −5257%	1500−1550 +5257%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Hitman 3	6−7 −4900%	300−310 +4900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3
−5400%

110−120

+5400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −5400%	55−60 +5400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3
−5400%

110−120

+5400%

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.31	17.06
Recency	15 June 2009	1 February 2018
Chip lithography	55 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	14 Watt	15 Watt

GT 220M has 7.1% lower power consumption.

RX Vega M, on the other hand, has a 5403.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX Vega M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 220M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 220M is a notebook card while Radeon RX Vega M is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.