GeForce MX330 vs Radeon HD 6970M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6970M and GeForce MX330, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 6970M
2011
1 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
5.88

MX330 outperforms HD 6970M by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking585571
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.6645.53
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameBlackcombGP108
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date4 January 2011 (13 years ago)10 February 2020 (4 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 cores960384
Core clock speed680 MHz1531 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1594 MHz
Number of transistors1,700 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate32.6438.26
Floating-point processing power1.306 TFLOPS1.224 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs4824

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth115.2 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

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.

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.06.4
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.21.2
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.

HD 6970M 5.88
GeForce MX330 6.31
+7.3%

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.

HD 6970M 2270
GeForce MX330 2434
+7.2%

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.

HD 6970M 2819
GeForce MX330 4834
+71.5%

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:

900p52
−5.8%
55−60
+5.8%
Full HD50
+127%
22
−127%
4K21−24
−9.5%
23
+9.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−26.7%
19
+26.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−28.6%
9
+28.6%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+9.1%
11
−9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−61.5%
21
+61.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
−68.8%
27
+68.8%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−7.9%
40−45
+7.9%
Hitman 3 12−14
−33.3%
16
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
−228%
118
+228%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−80%
27
+80%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−62.5%
26
+62.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
−10%
21−24
+10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−63.3%
80
+63.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−46.7%
22
+46.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−14.3%
8
+14.3%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+20%
10
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−38.5%
18
+38.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
−18.8%
19
+18.8%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−7.9%
40−45
+7.9%
Hitman 3 12−14
−25%
15
+25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
−194%
106
+194%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−40%
21
+40%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−25%
20
+25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
−10%
21−24
+10%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
−5.3%
20−22
+5.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−53.1%
75
+53.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+114%
7
−114%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+200%
4
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+8.3%
12
−8.3%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+138%
16
−138%
Hitman 3 12−14
−8.3%
13
+8.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+125%
16
−125%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
−10%
21−24
+10%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+58.3%
12
−58.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−4.1%
50−55
+4.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+77.8%
9
−77.8%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−17.6%
20−22
+17.6%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−8.1%
40−45
+8.1%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−21.4%
16−18
+21.4%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

This is how HD 6970M and GeForce MX330 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce MX330 is 6% faster in 900p
  • HD 6970M is 127% faster in 1080p
  • GeForce MX330 is 10% 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 HD 6970M is 200% faster.
  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX330 is 228% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD 6970M is ahead in 9 tests (13%)
  • GeForce MX330 is ahead in 44 tests (62%)
  • there's a draw in 18 tests (25%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.88 6.31
Recency 4 January 2011 10 February 2020
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 10 Watt

GeForce MX330 has a 7.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 650% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon HD 6970M and GeForce MX330.


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.


AMD Radeon HD 6970M
Radeon HD 6970M
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.


2.7 92 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6970M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 2139 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.