GeForce MX330 vs Radeon RX Vega Nano

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated577
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data43.10
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameVega 10GP108
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release dateno data10 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 cores4096384
Core clock speed1200 MHz1531 MHz
Boost clock speed1546 MHz1594 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)175 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate395.838.26
Floating-point processing powerno data1.224 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs25624

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length152 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone

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 typeHBM2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1600 MBps1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth409.6 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 Connectors1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4aNo outputs
HDMI+-

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 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.76.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.11.2
Vulkan1.31.2.131
CUDA-6.1

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 175 Watt 10 Watt

RX Vega Nano has a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GeForce MX330, on the other hand, has 1650% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega Nano and GeForce MX330. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega Nano 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.


AMD Radeon RX Vega Nano
Radeon RX Vega Nano
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.


3.5 4 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega Nano on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 2194 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.