NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX330 Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data places the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 in the single shared benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, with a score of 9294 versus 7896, a 17.7% advantage. The GTX 465 sits at the 46th percentile of all GPUs, while the MX330 sits at the 43rd percentile. For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in legacy applications, the GTX 465 is the clear choice. However, the MX330 offers a fundamentally different trade-off: it consumes a fraction of the power and is designed for portable devices, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where the GTX 465, a dual-slot card requiring two 6-pin power connectors, cannot physically fit. The data suggests the GTX 465 for desktop users with power headroom, and the MX330 for mobile users who need basic acceleration without the GTX 465's size and power demands.

The MX330 also shows a Vulkan score of 9019, which is not present for the GTX 465, indicating the MX330 has a measurable advantage in that API. The GTX 465 has no recorded Vulkan result, so comparisons in that area are incomplete. The MX330's average benchmark score across its two recorded tests is 8458, which is lower than the GTX 465's average of 9294, but the MX330's Vulkan capability is a distinct feature that may matter for modern titles. The verdict depends on the workload: the GTX 465 wins on pure OpenCL compute, while the MX330 wins on portability and API support.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural eras and manufacturing processes. The GTX 465 uses the GF100 chip based on the Fermi architecture, built on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It contains 3,100 million transistors on a die size of 529 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 5.9M per mm². The MX330 uses the GP108B chip based on the Pascal architecture, built on a 14 nm process at Samsung. It contains 1,800 million transistors on a much smaller die of 74 mm², yielding a transistor density of 24.3M per mm². This density difference is substantial: the MX330 packs over four times more transistors per square millimeter, a reflection of the newer fabrication technology.

The GTX 465 has 352 shading units, 44 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The MX330 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. While the MX330 has more shaders, it has fewer TMUs and ROPs. The GTX 465 features a 256-bit memory bus with 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory, while the MX330 uses a 64-bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR5 memory. Memory bandwidth differs significantly: the GTX 465 delivers 102.7 GB/s, while the MX330 delivers 56.06 GB/s. The GTX 465's memory clock is listed at 802 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective), while the MX330's is 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective), but the wider bus on the GTX 465 gives it the bandwidth advantage.

The MX330 has explicit base and boost clocks of 1531 MHz and 1594 MHz, while the GTX 465 has no base or boost clock recorded. The MX330 also supports Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1), whereas the GTX 465 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and has no Vulkan listing. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The MX330 has a TDP of 10 W and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP), while the GTX 465 has a TDP of 200 W and is dual-slot with two 6-pin power connectors. The MX330 uses PCIe 3.0 x4, while the GTX 465 uses PCIe 2.0 x16.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 465 wins in raw compute and memory bandwidth. Its OpenCL score of 9294 is 17.7% higher than the MX330's 7896, and its memory bandwidth of 102.7 GB/s is nearly double the MX330's 56.06 GB/s. The GTX 465 also has a higher pixel rate of 13.38 GPixel/s versus 25.50 GPixel/s for the MX330, which is a surprising inversion: the MX330 actually has a higher pixel rate despite having half the ROPs (16 versus 32). The GTX 465's texture rate is 26.75 GTexel/s, while the MX330's is 38.26 GTexel/s, again favoring the MX330. In terms of raw FP32 compute, the MX330 leads with 1,224.2 GFLOPS versus 855.4 GFLOPS for the GTX 465, a 43% advantage. These numbers suggest the MX330 is more efficient per clock, but the GTX 465's wider memory bus and higher bandwidth help it in memory-bound workloads.

The MX330 wins in efficiency and portability. Its 10 W TDP is a fraction of the GTX 465's 200 W, and it requires no power connectors, while the GTX 465 needs two 6-pin connectors and a suggested 550 W PSU. The MX330 is an IGP, meaning it is integrated into a portable device, while the GTX 465 is a dual-slot card measuring 241 mm (9.5 inches) in length. The MX330 also has a Vulkan score of 9019, which is absent for the GTX 465, indicating support for a modern API that the older card lacks. For users running Vulkan-based applications, the MX330 has a measurable advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher OpenCL score?

A: The GTX 465 scores 9294 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the MX330 scores 7896. The GTX 465 leads by 17.7%.

Q: Does the MX330 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the MX330 has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 9019 and lists Vulkan 1.4 support. The GTX 465 has no Vulkan score or version listed in the database.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The GTX 465 has a memory bandwidth of 102.7 GB/s, while the MX330 has 56.06 GB/s. The GTX 465's bandwidth is roughly 83% higher.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The MX330 has a transistor density of 24.3M per mm², compared to the GTX 465's 5.9M per mm². The MX330's density is over four times higher.

Q: What are their power requirements?

A: The GTX 465 has a TDP of 200 W and requires two 6-pin power connectors with a suggested 550 W PSU. The MX330 has a TDP of 10 W and requires no power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The MX330 has 384 shading units, while the GTX 465 has 352. The MX330 has a modest 9% more shaders.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test. The GTX 465 scores 9294, and the MX330 scores 7896, giving the GTX 465 a 17.7% win. This is a substantial margin, but it is importantly the MX330 has a second benchmark result, Geekbench Vulkan at 9019, which has no counterpart for the GTX 465. If the Vulkan score were included in an average, the MX330's average would be 8458, still below the GTX 465's 9294, but the Vulkan result shows the MX330 is not far behind in a different API.

The GTX 465's nearest rivals include the GTX 850M (avg score 9302, delta -0.1%), the Radeon R7 M380 (9313, delta -0.2%), the GTX 960 (9273, delta 0.2%), and the Radeon Vega 8 (9221, delta 0.8%). These deltas are all within 1%, indicating the GTX 465 sits in a tight cluster of similar-performing GPUs. The MX330's nearest rivals include the Radeon HD 8870M (8462, delta 0%), the Radeon 880M (8436, delta 0.3%), the GTX 675MX (8427, delta 0.4%), and the Intel Arc A380 (8558, delta -1.2%). The MX330's average score of 8458 places it in a similar tight cluster, but at a lower absolute level than the GTX 465's cluster.

The biggest single win for the GTX 465 is the OpenCL test, where it is 17.7% ahead of the MX330. The biggest win for the MX330 is its Vulkan score, which is not directly comparable but demonstrates API support that the GTX 465 lacks. In terms of raw specifications, the MX330 leads in FP32 compute (1,224.2 GFLOPS versus 855.4 GFLOPS), pixel rate (25.50 GPixel/s versus 13.38 GPixel/s), and texture rate (38.26 GTexel/s versus 26.75 GTexel/s). The GTX 465 leads in memory bandwidth (102.7 GB/s versus 56.06 GB/s) and has a wider memory bus (256-bit versus 64-bit). These specification differences explain why the GTX 465 wins in OpenCL despite the MX330's higher compute throughput: the GTX 465's memory subsystem is better suited to certain workloads.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every recorded specification except for manufacturer (both NVIDIA), memory type (both GDDR5), and OpenGL version (both 4.6). Key differences include:

• Architecture and process: GTX 465 uses Fermi on 40 nm at TSMC; MX330 uses Pascal on 14 nm at Samsung.
• Transistors and die size: GTX 465 has 3,100 million transistors on 529 mm²; MX330 has 1,800 million on 74 mm².
• Transistor density: GTX 465 at 5.9M / mm²; MX330 at 24.3M / mm².
• Clocks: GTX 465 has only a memory clock of 802 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective); MX330 has base 1531 MHz, boost 1594 MHz, and memory clock 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective).
• Memory: GTX 465 has 1024 MB on a 256-bit bus with 102.7 GB/s bandwidth; MX330 has 2 GB on a 64-bit bus with 56.06 GB/s bandwidth.
• Shading units, TMUs, ROPs: GTX 465 has 352/44/32; MX330 has 384/24/16.
• Pixel and texture rates: GTX 465 at 13.38 GPixel/s and 26.75 GTexel/s; MX330 at 25.50 GPixel/s and 38.26 GTexel/s.
• FP32 and FP16: GTX 465 at 855.4 GFLOPS with no FP16; MX330 at 1,224.2 GFLOPS with 19.13 GFLOPS FP16 (1:64).
• TDP and power: GTX 465 at 200 W, dual-slot, 2x 6-pin, suggested 550 W PSU; MX330 at 10 W, IGP, no connectors, no suggested PSU.
• Bus interface: GTX 465 uses PCIe 2.0 x16; MX330 uses PCIe 3.0 x4.
• Display outputs: GTX 465 has 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a; MX330 is portable device dependent.
• DirectX and Vulkan: GTX 465 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) with no Vulkan; MX330 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4.
• Dimensions: GTX 465 is 241 mm (9.5 inches) long; MX330 has no recorded dimensions.
• Release date: GTX 465 from 2010-05-30; MX330 from 2020-02-09.
• Launch MSRP: GTX 465 at 279 USD; MX330 has no recorded MSRP.