
GeForce 305M vs GeForce GT 220M

GeForce 305M
Popular choices:

GeForce GT 220M
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce 305M is positioned at rank 299 and the GeForce GT 220M is on rank 358, so the GeForce 305M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 305M
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT 220M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GT 220M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 6.6% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (1 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 305M.
| Insight | GeForce 305M | GeForce GT 220M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-6.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+6.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GT 220M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 305M and GeForce GT 220M

GeForce 305M
The GeForce 305M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 549 MHz to 549 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 151 points.

GeForce GT 220M
The GeForce GT 220M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 9 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 941 MHz to 967 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 161 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce 305M scores 151 versus the GeForce GT 220M's 161 — the GeForce GT 220M leads by 6.6%. The GeForce 305M is built on Maxwell while the GeForce GT 220M uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 305M) vs 384 (GeForce GT 220M). Raw compute: 0.4216 TFLOPS (GeForce 305M) vs 0.7427 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 220M). Boost clocks: 549 MHz vs 967 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce 305M | GeForce GT 220M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 151 | 161+7% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.4216 TFLOPS | 0.7427 TFLOPS+76% |
| Boost Clock | 549 MHz | 967 MHz+76% |
| ROPs | 8 | 16+100% |
| TMUs | 24 | 32+33% |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB+500% | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 305M | GeForce GT 220M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce 305M comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GT 220M has 1 GB. The GeForce GT 220M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 305M) vs 0.25 MB (GeForce GT 220M) — the GeForce 305M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 305M | GeForce GT 220M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 1 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 0.25 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (GeForce 305M) vs 10.0 (GeForce GT 220M). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 1.
| Feature | GeForce 305M | GeForce GT 220M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 2+100% | 1 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce 305M) vs No (GeForce GT 220M). Decoder: PureVideo VP4 vs PureVideo HD VP3. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 (GeForce 305M) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (GeForce GT 220M).
| Feature | GeForce 305M | GeForce GT 220M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | No |
| Decoder | PureVideo VP4 | PureVideo HD VP3 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 305M draws 33W versus the GeForce GT 220M's 50W — a 41% difference. The GeForce 305M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 305M) vs 350W (GeForce GT 220M). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | GeForce 305M | GeForce GT 220M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 33W-34% | 50W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 70°C-13% |
| Perf/Watt | 4.6+44% | 3.2 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















