OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v1.0: technical specifications plus authentic consumer ratings, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v1.0

NVIDIA GeForce MX330 Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£780VRAM:2 GBMemory bus width:64 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):25 W

NVIDIA GeForce MX330 Review: Compare 118 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

3.8/10

Overall score

Score
3.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the graphics card's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best graphics cards on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
Score components

90%

3.8

Technical score

10%

?

User score

â–¼Worse than 98% of graphics cards
4.6

Value for money

Value for money
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components

70%

3.8

Overall score

30%

6.4

Price

â–¼Worse than 99%
3.8

Technical score

Technical score
3.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components

44%

2.3

Performance

24%

1.5

Memory

12%

8.3

Power & Cooling

11%

7.1

Platform & Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

6.4

Connectivity & Media

â–¼Worse than 95%
?

User score

User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £780
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA GeForce MX330

Technical score
Technical score
3.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components:

44%

2.3

Performance

24%

1.5

Memory

12%

8.3

Power & Cooling

11%

7.1

Platform & Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

6.4

Connectivity & Media

3.8
User score
User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

?
Popularity
Popularity
1.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you prefer a graphics card that has already been chosen and reviewed by many other users.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Popularity:
NVIDIA GeForce MX330 has a popularity score of 1 point, which is lower than that of 57.7% of products in this category.
1.0
Value for money
Value for money
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components:

70%

3.8

Overall score

30%

6.4

Price

4.6
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
894 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 894 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 98.6% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.2% of graphics cards and equal to 16.8% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
2,349 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 2,349 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 97.7% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
969 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 969 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 97.2% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
1.22 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 1.22 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 97.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
2 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 2 GB of VRAM, which is less than 94.5% of graphics cards and equal to 3.8% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
GDDR version
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.9% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
64 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 64 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 97.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.8% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
56.1 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 56.1 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 98.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.7% of graphics cards and equal to 20.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x4
This graphics card uses x4 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 99% of graphics cards and equal to 1.1% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12.1
This graphics card supports DirectX 12.1, which is older than on 77.4% of graphics cards and equal to 4.4% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.7% of graphics cards and equal to 79.3% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 1.9% of graphics cards and equal to 98.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
3
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 3 displays, which is fewer than 91.8% of graphics cards and equal to 5.9% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
3840x2160
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 3840x2160, which is lower than that of 97.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.8% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
?
DisplayPort version
1.4
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4, which is older than on 80.6% of graphics cards and equal to 13.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
5.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 5.4 Gbps, which is slower than on 87.8% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
25 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 25 W, which is lower than that of 99% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
25 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 25 W under peak load, which is lower than 99.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
?
Board power limit
25 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 25 W, which is lower than that of 99.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
25 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

NVIDIA GeForce MX330 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 88.4% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (25 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    25 W vs 215 W
  • 88.9% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (25 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    25 W vs 225 W
  • 88.6% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (25 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    25 W vs 220 W
  • 74.9% smaller GPU die
    This graphics card has a lower GPU die size than the average graphics card (74 mm² vs 295 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 295 mm².
    74 mm² vs 295 mm²
  • 74.9% smaller GPU die
    This graphics card has a lower GPU die size than the average graphics card (74 mm² vs 295 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 295 mm².
    74 mm² vs 295 mm²
  • 88.4% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (25 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    25 W vs 215 W
  • 88.9% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (25 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    25 W vs 225 W
  • 88.6% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (25 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    25 W vs 220 W
  • 192 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (64 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    64 bit vs 256 bit
  • 36.4% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,594 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,594 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 37 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (3 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    3 vs 40
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 2.8x larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (14 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    14 nm vs 5 nm
  • 160 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (24 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    24 vs 184
  • 90% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (38.3 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    38.3 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 58% worse value for money
    NVIDIA GeForce MX330 has worse value for money than the average graphics card (4.55 vs 7.2).
    4.55 vs 7.2
  • 4.22x less popular
    NVIDIA GeForce MX330 is less popular than the average graphics card (1 vs 4.2).
    1 vs 4.22
  • 47.2% more expensive
    NVIDIA GeForce MX330 is more expensive than the average graphics card (£780 vs £530).
    £780 vs £530
  • 36.4% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,594 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,594 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 37 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (3 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    3 vs 40
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 160 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (24 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    24 vs 184
  • 90% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (38.3 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    38.3 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 84.4% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (25.5 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    25.5 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 48 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (16 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    16 vs 64
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 94.6% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (1.2 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    1.22 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 20.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,531 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,531 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 89.6% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (2,349 points vs 22,653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,653 points.
    2,349 points vs 22,653 points
  • 93.9% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (894 points vs 14,678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,678.5 points.
    894 points vs 14,678.5 points
  • 92% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (969 points vs 12,074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,074 points.
    969 points vs 12,074 points
  • 94.7% lower compute throughput
    This graphics card has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (1.2 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 22.98 TFLOPS.
    1.22 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS
  • 91.7% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.04 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 3,968 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (384 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    384 vs 4,352
  • 192 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (64 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
    64 bit vs 256 bit
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 87.5% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (56.1 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    56.1 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 63.2% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (7,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    7,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 62.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (48 vs 128). The average graphics card has 128 L1 cache.
    48 vs 128
  • 2.8x larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (14 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    14 nm vs 5 nm
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x4 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x4 vs x16
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3.0 vs 4.0
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • Worse SAM support
    This graphics card offers worse SAM support than the average graphics card (no vs yes).
  • 3 older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2020 vs 2023).
    February 2020
    2,020 vs 2,023
  • Lower VRS tier
    This graphics card supports a lower VRS tier than the average graphics card (Tier 1 vs Tier 2).
    Tier 1 vs Tier 2
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.1 vs 6.8).
    6.1 vs 6.8
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12.1 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12.1 vs 12 Ultimate
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 92.1% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (1,800 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    1,800 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (3 vs 3.1).
    3.0 vs 3.1
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 1 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (3 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    3 vs 4
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • No VRR support
    This graphics card does not support VRR, the average graphics card does.
  • Narrower encode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware encode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 1.4a).
    1.4 vs 1.4a
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1).
    2.0b vs 2.1
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (3840x2160 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    3840x2160 vs 7680x4320
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • No HDMI output
    This graphics card does not include HDMI output, the average graphics card does.
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • Narrower decode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware decode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1).
    H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (3 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    3 vs 6
  • No 3D output
    This graphics card does not support 3D output, the average graphics card does.
  • 73% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (5.4 Gbps vs 20 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 20 Gbps.
    5.4 Gbps vs 20 Gbps
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 18 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (85 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    85 °C vs 67 °C
  • 9.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (45 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    45 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

7.0
TECH & GAMES WORLD
≈ estimated
09/09/2024
Hands-on test · gaming performance in an ultrabook
Verdict
The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 runs light and older games on an ultrabook, but thermal limits hold it back, so it's worth saving for a faster card.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

N
notebookcheck.net
13/02/2020
Summary of the review
NVIDIA GeForce MX330 Laptop Graphics Card Review
notebookcheck.net
12/03/2020
Benchmark test · MX330 vs MX350
Verdict
The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 handles 720p Low, but at 1080p Medium the tested games drop to 11–31 fps.
notebookcheck.com
10/03/2020
Comparison test · MX330 and MX350
Verdict
The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 handles 720p in games like Rocket League and FIFA 20, but at 1080p Medium it drops to 11–22 fps.
notebooks-und-mobiles.de
17/10/2020
Benchmark test · Entry-level GPU
Verdict
The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 is a usable entry-level chip for everyday apps and older games, but it struggles with current 3D titles.
N
nbreview.de
20/08/2020
Summary of the review
Thinkpad T15 20S7S02U00 (with Nvidia and 4K display in review)
(Translated)Show original
H
htcn.fr
28/09/2024
Summary of the review
Full Review of the Acer TravelMate P2: Analysis, Opinion, and Performance
(Translated)Show original
M
medianaranja.fr
2024
Summary of the review
Intel Iris Xe Graphics vs NVIDIA and AMD GPUs (MX330 Performance Comparison)
(Translated)Show original
N
notebookcheck.biz
28/03/2020
Summary of the review
Nvidia GeForce MX330 and MX350 review: familiar architecture, new name.
(Translated)Show original
notebookcheck.org
14/03/2020
Comparison test · MX330 and MX350
Verdict
The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 handles 720p in games like Rocket League and FIFA 20, but at 1080p Medium it drops to 11–22 fps.
notebookcheck.it
12/03/2020
Comparison test · MX330 and MX350
Verdict
The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 handles 720p in games like Rocket League and FIFA 20, but at 1080p Medium it drops to 11–22 fps.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA GeForce MX330

  • Significantly better performance than most basic integrated graphics (e.g., Intel UHD) for light tasks
  • Smoothly handles light gaming (Minecraft, Fortnite, Dota 2) at medium settings
  • Efficient power consumption (10-25W TDP), contributing to better laptop battery life
  • Capable of basic creative work such as 1080p video editing and graphic design (Photoshop, Illustrator)
  • Generally reliable and quiet operation in thin-and-light laptop designs

What customers don't like about NVIDIA GeForce MX330

  • Struggles with modern AAA titles (e.g., Red Dead Redemption 2, Cyberpunk 2077), often requiring low settings at 720p to reach playable frame rates
  • Limited by 2GB of GDDR5 VRAM, which is insufficient for high-resolution textures or intensive 3D rendering
  • Lacks modern NVIDIA features such as DLSS, Ray Tracing, and Tensor Cores
  • Performance is nearly identical to older MX250 and MX150 models, offering little year-over-year improvement
  • Susceptible to thermal throttling and overheating in some compact laptop chassis during heavy use

Verdict

The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 is an entry-level dedicated mobile graphics card released in February 2020, based on the 14nm Pascal architecture (GP108 chip) with 384 CUDA cores, a base clock of 1531 MHz, and a boost clock of up to 1594 MHz. It typically features 2GB of GDDR5 VRAM on a 64-bit memory interface with a bandwidth of 56.06 GB/s and operates at a very low TDP of 10W to 25W. Its main pros include significantly better performance than most integrated graphics for light photo and video editing, support for NVIDIA Optimus technology to preserve battery life, and enough power to run older or less demanding titles like GTA V or CS:GO at 720p or 1080p medium settings. However, its primary cons are the outdated architecture which lacks support for modern features like Ray Tracing or DLSS, limited 2GB VRAM that struggles with modern AAA games, and a tendency to thermal throttle or overheat in thin laptop chassis during heavy loads.

Compare NVIDIA GeForce MX330 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA GeForce MX330 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found