Radeon RX 6650M XT vs GeForce GT 330M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GT 230M GT 240M GT 325M GT 330M GT 330M Mac Edition
VS
Radeon RX 6600M Radeon RX 6600S Radeon RX 6650M Radeon RX 6650M XT Radeon RX 6700S Radeon RX 6800S

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 330M and Radeon RX 6650M XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 330M
2010
1 GB GDDR3, 23 Watt
0.56

RX 6650M XT outperforms GT 330M by a whopping 7830% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GT 330M GT 330M
RX 6650M XT RX 6650M XT

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking122687
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.6725.37
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGT216Navi 23
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date10 January 2010 (15 years ago)4 January 2022 (3 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 cores482048
Core clock speed625 MHz2068 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2416 MHz
Number of transistors486 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate10.00309.2
Floating-point processing power0.06528 TFLOPS9.896 TFLOPS
Gigaflops182no data
ROPs864
TMUs16128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone
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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.28 GB/s256.0 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 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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.5
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.3
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.

GT 330M 0.56
RX 6650M XT 44.41
+7830%

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 330M 216
RX 6650M XT 17070
+7803%

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
−7400%
750−800
+7400%
Full HD18
−7678%
1400−1450
+7678%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−6150%
120−130
+6150%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−1271%
95−100
+1271%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−4750%
95−100
+4750%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−6150%
120−130
+6150%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−1271%
95−100
+1271%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−4750%
95−100
+4750%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−3850%
150−160
+3850%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−2171%
150−160
+2171%
Valorant 27−30
−739%
230−240
+739%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−6150%
120−130
+6150%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−1271%
95−100
+1271%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
−1535%
270−280
+1535%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−4750%
95−100
+4750%
Dota 2 10−12
−1227%
140−150
+1227%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−3850%
150−160
+3850%
Metro Exodus 0−1 95−100
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−2171%
150−160
+2171%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−3600%
140−150
+3600%
Valorant 27−30
−739%
230−240
+739%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−1271%
95−100
+1271%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−4750%
95−100
+4750%
Dota 2 10−12
−1227%
140−150
+1227%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−3850%
150−160
+3850%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−2171%
150−160
+2171%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−3600%
140−150
+3600%
Valorant 27−30
−739%
230−240
+739%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 1−2
−28200%
280−290
+28200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−5733%
170−180
+5733%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 45−50
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−11800%
110−120
+11800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−7800%
75−80
+7800%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2
−10900%
110−120
+10900%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 30−35
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−507%
90−95
+507%
Valorant 3−4
−8200%
240−250
+8200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
−5400%
55−60
+5400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−2800%
55−60
+2800%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−2650%
55−60
+2650%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Dota 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

This is how GT 330M and RX 6650M XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6650M XT is 7400% faster in 900p
  • RX 6650M XT is 7678% 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 RX 6650M XT is 28200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6650M XT is ahead in 35 tests (55%)
  • there's a draw in 29 tests (45%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.56 44.41
Recency 10 January 2010 4 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 120 Watt

GT 330M has 421.7% lower power consumption.

RX 6650M XT, on the other hand, has a 7830.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6650M XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 330M in performance tests.

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 RX 6650M XT
Radeon RX 6650M XT
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 330M GeForce GT 330M
vs
GT 230M GeForce GT 230M
RX 6650M XT Radeon RX 6650M XT
vs
RX 6850M XT Radeon RX 6850M XT
GT 330M GeForce GT 330M
vs
HD 8250 Radeon HD 8250
GT 220 GeForce GT 220
vs
ATI Xpress 1250 Radeon Xpress 1250
GT 220 GeForce GT 220
vs
HD 8760 OEM HD 8760 OEM
GT 220 GeForce GT 220
vs
Playstation 3 GPU 40nm 3 GPU 40nm
GT 220 GeForce GT 220
vs
GT 1010 DDR4 GT 1010 DDR4
GT 420M GeForce GT 420M
vs
GMA 950 GMA 950
GT 240M GeForce GT 240M
vs
GeForce 310M GeForce 310M
HD 6450 GDDR5 Radeon HD 6450 GDDR5
vs
GeForce2 MX + nForce 220 MX + nForce 220
HD 6515G2 Radeon HD 6515G2
vs
Quadro P500 Quadro P500
8700M GT GeForce 8700M GT
vs
RX 5700 RX 5700
Go 7800 GTX GeForce Go 7800 GTX
vs
RTX 4090 RTX 4090

Community ratings

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

3.1 126 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 69 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6650M XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 330M or Radeon RX 6650M XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.