ATI Radeon X1650 vs GeForce GT 330M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1207not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.69no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)R500 (2005−2007)
GPU code nameGT216RV516
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date10 January 2010 (14 years ago)20 November 2007 (16 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 cores48no data
Core clock speed625 MHz635 MHz
Number of transistors486 million107 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Wattno data
Texture fill rate10.002.540
Floating-point processing power0.06528 TFLOPSno data
Gigaflops182no data
ROPs84
TMUs164

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 sizedno data
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
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 typeGDDR3DDR2
Maximum RAM amount1 GB256 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz392 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.28 GB/s6.272 GB/s
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 ConnectorsHDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGADisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
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 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_1)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model4.13.0
OpenGL2.12.0
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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



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
+204%
ATI X1650 71

Pros & cons summary


Recency 10 January 2010 20 November 2007
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 80 nm

GT 330M has an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 330M and Radeon X1650. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GT 330M is a notebook card while Radeon X1650 is a desktop 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
ATI Radeon X1650
Radeon X1650

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.


3.2 115 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 65 votes

Rate Radeon X1650 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.