GeForce MX330 vs GTS 450

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTS 450 with GeForce MX330, including specs and performance data.

GTS 450
2010
1 GB GDDR5, 106 Watt
3.42

MX330 outperforms GTS 450 by an impressive 84% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking730577
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.66no data
Power efficiency2.2143.12
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGF106GP108
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date13 September 2010 (14 years ago)10 February 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$129 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 cores192384
Core clock speed783 MHz1531 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1594 MHz
Number of transistors1,170 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)106 Watt10 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature100 °Cno data
Texture fill rate25.0638.26
Floating-point processing power0.6013 TFLOPS1.224 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs3224

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 2.0 x 16no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length210 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1804 (3608 data rate) MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth57.7 GB/s48.06 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 ConnectorsMini HDMITwo Dual Link DVINo outputs
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.24.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA+6.1

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.

GTS 450 3.42
GeForce MX330 6.29
+83.9%

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.

GTS 450 1317
GeForce MX330 2424
+84.1%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTS 450 1888
GeForce MX330 4834
+156%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTS 450 1545
GeForce MX330 3762
+143%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTS 450 12447
GeForce MX330 20729
+66.5%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTS 450 4923
GeForce MX330 10707
+117%

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:

900p30
−83.3%
55−60
+83.3%
Full HD38
+72.7%
22
−72.7%
1200p27
−66.7%
45−50
+66.7%
4K12−14
−100%
24
+100%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.39no data
4K10.75no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−90%
19
+90%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−350%
9
+350%
Battlefield 5 7−8
−157%
18−20
+157%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−37.5%
11
+37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−200%
21
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−200%
27
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−116%
40−45
+116%
Hitman 3 8−9
−100%
16
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−372%
118
+372%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−440%
27
+440%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−189%
26
+189%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−57.1%
21−24
+57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−95.1%
80
+95.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−120%
22
+120%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−300%
8
+300%
Battlefield 5 7−8
−157%
18−20
+157%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−25%
10
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−157%
18
+157%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−111%
19
+111%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−116%
40−45
+116%
Hitman 3 8−9
−87.5%
15
+87.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−324%
106
+324%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−320%
21
+320%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−122%
20
+122%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−57.1%
21−24
+57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−33.3%
20−22
+33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−82.9%
75
+82.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+42.9%
7
−42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+100%
4
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−71.4%
12
+71.4%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+18.8%
16
−18.8%
Hitman 3 8−9
−62.5%
13
+62.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+56.3%
16
−56.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−57.1%
21−24
+57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+25%
12
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−24.4%
50−55
+24.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−1900%
20−22
+1900%
Hitman 3 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−75%
14−16
+75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
−90.5%
40−45
+90.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how GTS 450 and GeForce MX330 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce MX330 is 83% faster in 900p
  • GTS 450 is 73% faster in 1080p
  • GeForce MX330 is 67% faster in 1200p
  • GeForce MX330 is 100% faster in 4K

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

  • in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTS 450 is 100% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GeForce MX330 is 1900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTS 450 is ahead in 5 tests (7%)
  • GeForce MX330 is ahead in 57 tests (80%)
  • there's a draw in 9 tests (13%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.42 6.29
Recency 13 September 2010 10 February 2020
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 106 Watt 10 Watt

GeForce MX330 has a 83.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 960% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX330 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 450 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTS 450 is a desktop card while GeForce MX330 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 GTS 450
GeForce GTS 450
NVIDIA GeForce MX330
GeForce MX330

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.


3.6 2664 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 2196 votes

Rate GeForce MX330 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.