GeForce GT 220 vs Radeon RX 480

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 480 and GeForce GT 220, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX 480
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
22.35
+3821%

RX 480 outperforms GT 220 by a whopping 3821% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking2501212
Place by popularity97not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation15.82no data
Power efficiency10.210.67
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameEllesmereGT216
GCN generation4th Genno data
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date29 June 2016 (8 years ago)12 October 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 $79.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 480 and GT 220 have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores230448
Compute units36no data
Core clock speed1120 MHz625 MHz
Boost clock speed1266 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,700 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt58 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate182.39.840
Floating-point processing power5.834 TFLOPS0.1277 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs14416

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 supportn/aPCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length241 mm168 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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 amount8 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed8000 MHz790 MHz
Memory bandwidth224 GB/s25.3 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortVGADVIHDMI
Multi monitor supportno data+
Eyefinity+-
HDMI2.0+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
DisplayPort support1.4HDR-
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF + HDA

Supported technologies

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

AppAccelerationn/a-
CrossFire+-
Enduron/a-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
HD3Dn/a-
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudion/a-
ZeroCore+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1211.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.44.1
OpenGL4.53.1
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan+N/A
Mantlen/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.

RX 480 22.35
+3821%
GT 220 0.57

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.

RX 480 8609
+3831%
GT 220 219

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:

Full HD78
+271%
21
−271%
1440p52
+5100%
1−2
−5100%
4K350−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.943.81
1440p4.4079.99
4K6.54no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+1100%
3−4
−1100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 58
+1350%
4−5
−1350%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40 0−1
Battlefield 5 70−75
+7200%
1−2
−7200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+1400%
3−4
−1400%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+1100%
3−4
−1100%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+5100%
1−2
−5100%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60
+5800%
1−2
−5800%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+4367%
3−4
−4367%
Hitman 3 40−45
+780%
5−6
−780%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+855%
10−12
−855%
Metro Exodus 93
+4550%
2−3
−4550%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+5800%
1−2
−5800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110
+1733%
6−7
−1733%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+223%
30−33
−223%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 93
+2225%
4−5
−2225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40 0−1
Battlefield 5 48
+4700%
1−2
−4700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+1400%
3−4
−1400%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+1100%
3−4
−1100%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+5100%
1−2
−5100%
Far Cry New Dawn 31
+3000%
1−2
−3000%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+4367%
3−4
−4367%
Hitman 3 40−45
+780%
5−6
−780%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+855%
10−12
−855%
Metro Exodus 78
+7700%
1−2
−7700%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+5800%
1−2
−5800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
+1150%
6−7
−1150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+390%
10−11
−390%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+223%
30−33
−223%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35
+775%
4−5
−775%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+1400%
3−4
−1400%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+1100%
3−4
−1100%
Far Cry 5 45
+4400%
1−2
−4400%
Forza Horizon 4 77
+7600%
1−2
−7600%
Hitman 3 40−45
+780%
5−6
−780%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+855%
10−12
−855%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
+1150%
6−7
−1150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 44
+340%
10−11
−340%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+223%
30−33
−223%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+5800%
1−2
−5800%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 65
+6400%
1−2
−6400%
Far Cry New Dawn 42
+4100%
1−2
−4100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Far Cry 5 30
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+4100%
3−4
−4100%
Hitman 3 24−27
+333%
6−7
−333%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+1433%
3−4
−1433%
Metro Exodus 50
+4900%
1−2
−4900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+4600%
1−2
−4600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+12800%
1−2
−12800%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+1133%
3−4
−1133%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 31 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 21 0−1
Hitman 3 16−18 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 60
+5900%
1−2
−5900%
Metro Exodus 25 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 17
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 0−1
Far Cry 5 15 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 30−35 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%

This is how RX 480 and GT 220 compete in popular games:

  • RX 480 is 271% faster in 1080p
  • RX 480 is 5100% faster in 1440p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 480 is 12800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, RX 480 surpassed GT 220 in all 35 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 22.35 0.57
Recency 29 June 2016 12 October 2009
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 58 Watt

RX 480 has a 3821.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

GT 220, on the other hand, has 158.6% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 480 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 220 in performance tests.


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 RX 480
Radeon RX 480
NVIDIA GeForce GT 220
GeForce GT 220

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.


4.2 1845 votes

Rate Radeon RX 480 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 776 votes

Rate GeForce GT 220 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.