AMD Radeon 540 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX330 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 and AMD Radeon 540 are both end-of-life mobile and entry-level desktop GPUs, respectively, that target similar performance tiers but achieve their results through very different design philosophies. The benchmark data shows a split decision: the MX330 takes a commanding lead in OpenCL compute workloads, while the Radeon 540 edges ahead in Vulkan graphics performance. This makes the choice between them entirely dependent on whether your priority is raw compute throughput or API-specific gaming capability.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 is the clear winner in compute-oriented tasks. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 7896 stands 27.7% ahead of the Radeon 540’s 6184, a substantial margin that indicates significantly stronger raw parallel processing power. This advantage makes the MX330 the better choice for applications that leverage OpenCL acceleration, such as video encoding, image processing, or GPU-accelerated productivity tools. The MX330’s average benchmark score of 8458 also places it 10.2% above the Radeon 540’s 7673 average, reinforcing its overall compute superiority.

The AMD Radeon 540 fights back in the Vulkan graphics API. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 9162 narrowly beats the MX330’s 9019, a 1.6% margin that, while slim, shows AMD’s architecture handles this modern graphics API more efficiently. For gaming scenarios that use Vulkan, the Radeon 540 holds a slight edge. Additionally, the Radeon 540’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti with a delta of -0.6%, implying it trades blows with a much higher-tier card, whereas the MX330’s closest competitor is the AMD Radeon HD 8870M at a 0% delta. This suggests the Radeon 540 may punch above its weight class in certain workloads, despite its lower overall average score.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from opposing architectural schools. The MX330 uses NVIDIA’s Pascal architecture, built on a GP108B chip at Samsung’s 14 nm process, while the Radeon 540 employs AMD’s GCN 4.0 architecture on the Lexa chip, fabricated by GlobalFoundries at the same 14 nm node. Despite the identical process node, the chips differ significantly in size and complexity: the MX330’s die measures 74 mm² with 1,800 million transistors, while the Radeon 540’s die is larger at 103 mm² with 2,200 million transistors. This gives the MX330 a higher transistor density of 24.3M / mm² compared to the Radeon 540’s 21.4M / mm².

Both GPUs share identical core counts: 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operations pipelines. However, the clock speeds and memory subsystems diverge sharply. The MX330 runs at a base clock of 1531 MHz with a boost of 1594 MHz, while the Radeon 540’s base and boost clocks are not listed in the data. The memory configuration also differs: the MX330 offers 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus with 56.06 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Radeon 540 provides only 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 32-bit bus with a much narrower 24.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Power consumption tells a dramatic story. The MX330 is rated at a mere 10 W TDP with an IGP slot width and no power connectors, making it suitable for ultra-portable thin-and-light laptops. The Radeon 540, by contrast, draws 50 W, requires a single-slot cooler, and recommends a 250 W PSU, marking it as a more traditional add-in card. API support also differs slightly: the MX330 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Radeon 540 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 wins decisively, scoring 7896 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the AMD Radeon 540’s 6184, a 27.7% advantage.

Q: Which GPU performs better in Vulkan graphics?

A: The AMD Radeon 540 takes a narrow lead with a Geekbench Vulkan score of 9162, slightly ahead of the MX330’s 9019 (a 1.6% margin).

Q: Do these GPUs have the same core configuration?

A: Yes, both feature 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, despite their different architectures and chip designs.

Q: How do their memory systems compare?

A: The MX330 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus with 56.06 GB/s bandwidth, while the Radeon 540 offers 1024 MB on a 32-bit bus with 24.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The MX330 draws only 10 W with an IGP form factor, whereas the Radeon 540 consumes 50 W and requires a single-slot design with a 250 W PSU recommendation.

Q: Which card has better overall average benchmark performance?

A: The MX330 leads with an average benchmark score of 8458, compared to the Radeon 540’s 7673, placing the MX330 in the 43rd percentile versus the Radeon 540’s 41st percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce MX330 | AMD Radeon 540 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 4.0 |

| Chip | GP108B | Lexa |

| Process Node | 14 nm (Samsung) | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) |

| Transistors | 1,800 million | 2,200 million |

| Die Size | 74 mm² | 103 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1531 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 1594 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 32 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 56.06 GB/s | 24.00 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective) | 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) |

| FP32 Performance | 1,224.2 GFLOPS | 908.5 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 19.13 GFLOPS (1:64) | 908.5 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| Pixel Rate | 25.50 GPixel/s | 18.93 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 38.26 GTexel/s | 28.39 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 10 W | 50 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x4 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 2x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2020-02-09 | 2017-04-19 |

| Predecessor | Not listed | Arctic Islands |

| Successor | Not listed | Vega |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test delivers the most lopsided result in this comparison. The MX330 scores 7896 against the Radeon 540’s 6184, producing a 27.7% delta in NVIDIA’s favor. This is not a marginal difference; it represents a substantial gap in compute throughput that will manifest in any OpenCL-accelerated application. The MX330’s higher FP32 performance of 1,224.2 GFLOPS versus the Radeon 540’s 908.5 GFLOPS explains much of this gap, as does its wider 64-bit memory bus delivering 56.06 GB/s versus the Radeon 540’s 32-bit bus at 24.00 GB/s. Memory bandwidth is often the bottleneck in compute workloads, and the MX330 has more than double the bandwidth available.

The Vulkan benchmark flips the script, though with far less drama. The Radeon 540 scores 9162, narrowly edging out the MX330’s 9019 for a 1.6% win. This result is notable because the Radeon 540 achieves it despite lower raw compute specs and half the memory capacity. The Radeon 540’s FP16 performance of 908.5 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio) is dramatically higher than the MX330’s 19.13 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), which may contribute to its Vulkan efficiency in certain shader workloads. Still, the margin is tight enough that real-world gaming differences between the two in Vulkan titles would likely be minor.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the MX330’s average score of 8458 puts it in a dead heat with the AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8462, 0% delta) and just 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon 880M. The Radeon 540’s 7673 average sits 0.6% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, a significantly more powerful card on paper, suggesting the Radeon 540’s architecture is particularly well-optimized for the specific benchmark mix used here.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear trade-off. The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 is the superior choice for anyone whose primary workload involves OpenCL compute acceleration. Its 27.7% lead in that benchmark, combined with a higher average score of 8458 and better overall percentile ranking (43rd vs 41st), makes it the more capable all-around GPU in raw performance terms. The MX330 also offers twice the memory capacity (2 GB vs 1024 MB) and more than double the bandwidth, which matters for texture-heavy workloads and larger datasets. Its 10 W power draw is a fraction of the Radeon 540’s 50 W, making it the obvious pick for ultra-portable systems where thermal and power constraints are paramount.

The AMD Radeon 540, however, is the better option for Vulkan-centric gaming. Its 9162 Vulkan score edges out the MX330, and its compatibility with DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3 covers modern graphics APIs effectively. The Radeon 540 also benefits from a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface compared to the MX330’s x4, which could reduce data transfer bottlenecks in some scenarios. Its dual DisplayPort 1.4a outputs make it more flexible for multi-monitor desktop setups, whereas the MX330’s outputs are portable-device dependent. For a budget desktop build with a 250 W PSU, the Radeon 540 is a functional, low-profile card that holds its own in graphics workloads despite its older release date and lower compute scores.

Choose the MX330 for compute power, memory capacity, and efficiency in mobile form factors. Choose the Radeon 540 for Vulkan gaming performance and desktop connectivity. Neither card dominates the other outright; they serve different priorities within the same performance tier.