GeForce 210 vs Radeon R9 270
Summary
Reasons to consider GeForce 210 |
| 119 watts lower power draw. This might be a strong point if your current power supply is not enough to handle the Radeon R9 270 . |
| Based on an outdated architecture (Nvidia Tesla), there are no performance optimizations for current games and applications |
| PhysX support, however PhysX performance on newest games may be poor |
Reasons to consider Radeon R9 270 |
| This is a much newer product, it might have better long term support. |
| Higher theoretical gaming performance, based on specifications. |
| Supports Direct3D 12 Async Compute |
| Supports ReLive (allows game streaming/recording with minimum performance penalty) |
| Supports Mantle |
| Based on an outdated architecture (AMD GCN), there may be no performance optimizations for current games and applications |
HWBench recommends Radeon R9 270
Based on theoretical specifications.
Core Configuration
| GeForce 210 | | Radeon R9 270 | |
|---|
| GPU Name | GT218 (GT218-300-B1) | vs | Curacao (Curacao PRO) |
| Fab Process | 40 nm | vs | 28 nm |
| Die Size | 57 mm² | vs | 212 mm² |
| Transistors | 260 million | vs | 2,800 million |
| Shaders | 16 | vs | 1280 |
| Compute Units | 2 | vs | 20 |
| Core clock | 520 MHz | vs | 900 MHz |
| ROPs | 4 | vs | 32 |
| TMUs | 8 | vs | 80 |
Memory Configuration
| GeForce 210 | | Radeon R9 270 | |
|---|
| Memory Type | DDR3 | vs | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64 bit | vs | 256 bit |
| Memory Speed | 400 MHz
800 MHz effective | vs | 1400 MHz
5600 MHz effective |
| Memory Size | 512 Mb | vs | 2048 Mb |
Additional details
| GeForce 210 | | Radeon R9 270 | |
|---|
| TDP | 31 watts | vs | 150 watts |
| Release Date | 12 Oct 2009 | vs | 13 Nov 2013 |
GeForce 210
2.08 GP/s
Radeon R9 270
28.80 GP/s
GigaPixels - higher is better
GeForce 210
4.16 GT/s
Radeon R9 270
72.00 GT/s
GigaTexels - higher is better
GeForce 210
6.40 GB/s
Radeon R9 270
179.00 GB/s
GB/s - higher is better
GeForce 210
39.36 GFLOPs
Radeon R9 270
2304.00 GFLOPs
GFLOPs - higher is better