NVIDIA GeForce MX330 vs NVIDIA GeForce 840A
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce MX330 and NVIDIA GeForce 840A videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: Geekbench - OpenCL, PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce MX330
- Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- Around 49% higher core clock speed: 1531 MHz vs 1029 MHz
- Around 42% higher boost clock speed: 1594 MHz vs 1124 MHz
- 2127.9x more texture fill rate: 38.26 GTexel/s vs 17.98 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 3.3x lower typical power consumption: 10 Watt vs 33 Watt
- 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
- 2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 11049 vs 5430
- 2.4x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2718 vs 1137
- Around 61% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3533 vs 2188
- Around 61% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3533 vs 2188
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 10 Feb 2020 vs 17 March 2014 |
| Core clock speed | 1531 MHz vs 1029 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1594 MHz vs 1124 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 38.26 GTexel/s vs 17.98 GTexel / s |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt vs 33 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 1 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11049 vs 5430 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2718 vs 1137 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 vs 3347 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 vs 3347 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3533 vs 2188 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3533 vs 2188 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 840A
- Around 33% higher memory clock speed: 2002 MHz vs 1502 MHz (6008 MHz effective)
- Around 36% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 331 vs 243
- Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3200 vs 2713
- Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3200 vs 2713
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Memory clock speed | 2002 MHz vs 1502 MHz (6008 MHz effective) |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 331 vs 243 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3200 vs 2713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3200 vs 2713 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce MX330
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 840A
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce MX330 | NVIDIA GeForce 840A |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11049 | 5430 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 243 | 331 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2718 | 1137 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 3347 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 3347 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2713 | 3200 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2713 | 3200 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3533 | 2188 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3533 | 2188 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce MX330 | NVIDIA GeForce 840A | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell |
| Code name | GP108 | GM108 |
| Launch date | 10 Feb 2020 | 17 March 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 645 | 689 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1594 MHz | 1124 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1531 MHz | 1029 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 38.26 GFLOPS (1:32) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 19.13 GFLOPS (1:64) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 1,224 GFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 384 | 384 |
| Pixel fill rate | 25.50 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 38.26 GTexel/s | 17.98 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt | 33 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1800 million | |
| Floating-point performance | 863.2 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
| Width | IGP | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 48.06 GB/s | 16.02 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 64 bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1502 MHz (6008 MHz effective) | 2002 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce MX330 with others
NVIDIAGeForce MX330 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 6100 + nForce 430
NVIDIAGeForce MX330 vs
ATIMobility FireGL V5200
NVIDIAGeForce MX330 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8790M
NVIDIAGeForce MX330 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5100M
NVIDIAGeForce MX330 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K4100M
NVIDIAGeForce MX330 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition
