NVIDIA GeForce MX150 vs NVIDIA Quadro M1000M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce MX150 and NVIDIA Quadro M1000M 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 1 year(s) 8 month(s) later
• Around 48% higher texture fill rate: 46.98 GTexel / s vs 31.78 GTexel / s
• Around 11% better floating-point performance: 1,127 gflops vs 1,017 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• 4x lower typical power consumption: 10 Watt vs 40 Watt
• 1024x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 2 GB / 4 GB
• Around 8% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9584 vs 8849
• Around 20% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 45.905 vs 38.33
• Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 145.794 vs 137.786
• Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4330 vs 4196
• Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4330 vs 4196

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M1000M

• Around 6% higher core clock speed: 993 MHz vs 937 MHz
• Around 3% higher boost clock speed: 1072 MHz vs 1038 MHz
• Around 33% higher pipelines: 512 vs 384
• Around 25% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2835 vs 2259
• Around 44% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 307 vs 213
• Around 46% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 721.18 vs 495.238
• Around 29% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.056 vs 2.365
• Around 10% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 42.938 vs 38.965

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce MX150
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M1000M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2259 2835
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	213 307
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	9584 8849
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	45.905 38.33
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	495.238 721.18
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.365 3.056
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	38.965 42.938
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	145.794 137.786
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4330 4196
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3710 3716
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3356 3358
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4330 4196
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3710 3716
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3356 3358
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	999 1002

Compare specifications (specs)