NVIDIA
GeForce MX330 vs GeForce GTX 690
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GTX 690
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce MX330 and GTX 690 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗GTX 690 outperforms GeForce MX330 by ~10% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+10%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: GeForce MX330 (~5%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider GeForce MX330
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1 · NVIDIA Image Scaling (NIS)
Reasons to consider GTX 690
- Higher catalog performance index
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 3.0 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3134
10038
54100
5656
Graphics card ranking
Positions 147–152of 411
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce GTX 690
139 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
31
34Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
29
31Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
26
28Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
38
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
43Better
41
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Release date
HDMI
DisplayPort
USB Type-C
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Architecture
Memory type
Max resolution
Max monitors
Recommended PSU
Length
Compute API
Launch price—
Die sizeBetter
Transistor countBetter
Shader units / coresBetter
Interface
Power connector
Thickness
Memory cache
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Device class
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GeForce MX330 and GTX 690 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
GeForce MX330GTX 690
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
157 FPS
177 FPS
1080p Ultra
110 FPS
121 FPS
1440p Ultra
59 FPS
66 FPS
4K Ultra
21 FPS
24 FPS
Counter-Strike 2GeForce MX330157 FPSGTX 690177 FPSGeForce MX330110 FPSGTX 690121 FPSGeForce MX33059 FPSGTX 69066 FPSGeForce MX33021 FPSGTX 69024 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077GeForce MX330101 FPSGTX 690114 FPSGeForce MX33087 FPSGTX 69096 FPSGeForce MX33043 FPSGTX 69048 FPSGeForce MX33014 FPSGTX 69016 FPS
Forza Horizon 5GeForce MX330128 FPSGTX 690144 FPSGeForce MX33083 FPSGTX 69091 FPSGeForce MX33053 FPSGTX 69060 FPSGeForce MX33031 FPSGTX 69035 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyGeForce MX33083 FPSGTX 69093 FPSGeForce MX33069 FPSGTX 69076 FPSGeForce MX33038 FPSGTX 69043 FPSGeForce MX33015 FPSGTX 69016 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 10031349%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 10038373%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 10038405%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 10056560%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001003890%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 10042445%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 10041435%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 10038405%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10045462%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10038405%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX12.111.0
Vulkan1.41.2
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingNVIDIA Image Scaling (NIS)Not supported
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 3.0
Architecture and release
ArchitecturePascal / Turing / AmpereKepler
Process node14 nmBetter28 nm
Release date20202012
Device classMobileDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count1800 million3540 millionBetter
Die size74 mm²Better294 mm²
Shader units / cores3841536Better
Base clock1531 MHzBetter915 MHz
Boost clock1594 MHzBetter1019 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x4PCIe 3x16
LengthOEM dependent279 mm
ThicknessIGPDual-slot
Recommended PSUOEM dependent700 W
Power connectorNone8+8 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMIOEM dependentBoard dependent
DisplayPortOEM dependentmini-DisplayPort 1.2
USB Type-COEM dependentNo
Max monitorsOEM dependent4
Max resolutionDepends on host system4096 × 2160
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM2 GB GDDR54 GB GDDR5Better
Memory typeGDDR5 / GDDR6GDDR5
Memory bus64 bit256x2 bitBetter
TFLOPS1.2243.13Better
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 69
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (4)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (3)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GeForce MX330 or GTX 690?+
GeForce MX330 has the higher overall gaming score, while GTX 690 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GeForce MX330 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GeForce MX330 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GeForce MX330 offers more overall performance, while GeForce MX330 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GeForce MX330 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GTX 690 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GeForce MX330 leads in combined 1440p performance. GeForce MX330 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GeForce MX330 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GeForce MX330 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GeForce MX330 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to GeForce MX330 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.