NVIDIA GeForce MX150 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce MX150 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce MX150

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 2 month(s) later
• Around 3% higher core clock speed: 937 MHz vs 914 MHz
• Around 4% higher texture fill rate: 46.98 GTexel / s vs 44.96 GTexel / s
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• 7.5x lower typical power consumption: 10 Watt vs 75 Watt
• 2x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 1000 or 2500 MHz
• Around 8% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 45.905 vs 42.396
• Around 33% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 495.238 vs 373.644
• Around 5% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 145.794 vs 139.158
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4330 vs 4148
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4330 vs 4148

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M

• Around 8% higher boost clock speed: 1124 MHz vs 1038 MHz
• Around 67% higher pipelines: 640 vs 384
• Around 28% better floating-point performance: 1,439 gflops vs 1,127 gflops
• 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• Around 14% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2577 vs 2259
• Around 2% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 217 vs 213
• Around 2% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9744 vs 9584
• Around 7% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.54 vs 2.365
• Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 39.412 vs 38.965
• 3.4x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3350 vs 999

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce MX150
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2259 2577
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	213 217
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	9584 9744
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	45.905 42.396
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	495.238 373.644
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.365 2.54
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	38.965 39.412
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	145.794 139.158
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4330 4148
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3710 3715
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3356 3358
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4330 4148
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3710 3715
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3356 3358
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	999 3350

Compare specifications (specs)