Radeon Pro Vega 20 vs GeForce GT 330M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 330M with Radeon Pro Vega 20, including specs and performance data.

GT 330M
2010
1 GB GDDR2, GDDR3, DDR3, 23 Watt
0.56

Pro Vega 20 outperforms GT 330M by a whopping 2354% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking1220377
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGT2xx (2009−2012)Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code nameN11P-GE1Vega Mobile
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date10 January 2010 (14 years ago)15 November 2018 (5 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores481280
CUDA cores48no data
Core clock speed575 MHz815 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1283 MHz
Number of transistors486 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate9.200102.6
Floating-point performance0.1214 gflops3.284 gflops
Gigaflops182no 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 sizemedium sizedlarge
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR2, GDDR3, DDR3HBM2
Maximum RAM amount1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speedUp to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHzno data
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s189.4 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 ConnectorsHDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGADisplayPortNo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.3
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 330M 0.56
Pro Vega 20 13.74
+2354%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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 330M 216
Pro Vega 20 5299
+2353%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 330M 2658
Pro Vega 20 33590
+1164%

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:

900p10
−2300%
240−250
+2300%
Full HD17
−253%
60
+253%
4K1−2
−4000%
41
+4000%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−600%
21−24
+600%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−700%
30−35
+700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−833%
27−30
+833%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−600%
21−24
+600%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−5000%
51
+5000%
Hitman 3 5−6
−420%
24−27
+420%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−545%
70−75
+545%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−1167%
76
+1167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−147%
70−75
+147%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−700%
30−35
+700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−833%
27−30
+833%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−600%
21−24
+600%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−4500%
46
+4500%
Hitman 3 5−6
−420%
24−27
+420%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−545%
70−75
+545%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−650%
45−50
+650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−230%
30−35
+230%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−147%
70−75
+147%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−700%
30−35
+700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−833%
27−30
+833%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−600%
21−24
+600%
Hitman 3 5−6
−420%
24−27
+420%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−545%
70−75
+545%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−650%
45−50
+650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−210%
31
+210%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−147%
70−75
+147%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2000%
21−24
+2000%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 14−16
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−600%
7−8
+600%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
Hitman 3 6−7
−183%
16−18
+183%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−833%
27−30
+833%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−8400%
85−90
+8400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−633%
21−24
+633%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 6−7

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how GT 330M and Pro Vega 20 compete in popular games:

  • Pro Vega 20 is 2300% faster in 900p
  • Pro Vega 20 is 253% faster in 1080p
  • Pro Vega 20 is 4000% faster in 4K

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro Vega 20 is 8400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro Vega 20 is ahead in 35 tests (50%)
  • there's a draw in 35 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.56 13.74
Recency 10 January 2010 15 November 2018
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 100 Watt

GT 330M has 334.8% lower power consumption.

Pro Vega 20, on the other hand, has a 2353.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro Vega 20 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 330M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 330M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro Vega 20 is a mobile workstation 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 330M
GeForce GT 330M
AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20
Radeon Pro Vega 20

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.


3.2 112 votes

Rate GeForce GT 330M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 85 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 20 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.