GeForce GT 330M vs Radeon Pro 455

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro 455 with GeForce GT 330M, including specs and performance data.

Pro 455
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 35 Watt
8.07
+1341%

Pro 455 outperforms GT 330M by a whopping 1341% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5131212
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency16.071.70
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameBaffinGT216
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date30 October 2016 (8 years ago)10 January 2010 (14 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 cores76848
Core clock speed855 MHz625 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate41.0410.00
Floating-point processing power1.313 TFLOPS0.06528 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data182
ROPs168
TMUs4816

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8MXM-A (3.0)
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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1270 MHzUp to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth81.28 GB/s25.28 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 outputsHDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGADisplayPort
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.44.1
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
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. 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.

Pro 455 8.07
+1341%
GT 330M 0.56

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.

Pro 455 3112
+1341%
GT 330M 216

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.

Pro 455 16522
+522%
GT 330M 2658

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:

900p140−150
+1300%
10
−1300%
Full HD33
+94.1%
17
−94.1%
4K22
+2100%
1−2
−2100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12 0−1
Battlefield 5 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+1700%
3−4
−1700%
Hitman 3 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+318%
10−12
−318%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+350%
6−7
−350%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+90%
30−33
−90%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12 0−1
Battlefield 5 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+1700%
3−4
−1700%
Hitman 3 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+318%
10−12
−318%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+350%
6−7
−350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+90%
30−33
−90%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+1700%
3−4
−1700%
Hitman 3 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+318%
10−12
−318%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+350%
6−7
−350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+40%
10−11
−40%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+90%
30−33
−90%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Hitman 3 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Metro Exodus 10−11 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+5000%
1−2
−5000%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7 0−1
Hitman 3 4−5 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%
Metro Exodus 6−7 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 9−10 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%

This is how Pro 455 and GT 330M compete in popular games:

  • Pro 455 is 1300% faster in 900p
  • Pro 455 is 94% faster in 1080p
  • Pro 455 is 2100% 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 455 is 5000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Pro 455 surpassed GT 330M in all 35 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.07 0.56
Recency 30 October 2016 10 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 23 Watt

Pro 455 has a 1341.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

GT 330M, on the other hand, has 52.2% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 455 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 330M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 455 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GT 330M 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.


AMD Radeon Pro 455
Radeon Pro 455
NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M
GeForce GT 330M

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.


4.1 17 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 455 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 115 votes

Rate GeForce GT 330M 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.