NVIDIA GeForce MX450 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce MX450 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 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 - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/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, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce MX450
- Videocard is newer: launch date 12 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- Around 12% higher core clock speed: 1395 MHz vs 1242 MHz
- 2731.7x more texture fill rate: 100.8 GTexel/s vs 36.9 billion / sec
- 4.7x more pipelines: 896 vs 192
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 65 nm
- 3.6x lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 182 Watt
- 2.3x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 896 MB
- 10x more memory clock speed: 10002 MHz vs 999 MHz
- 3.1x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3750 vs 1208
- 5.8x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 307 vs 53
- Around 48% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 28933 vs 19512
- Around 78% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 849.116 vs 477.327
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 1 Aug 2020 vs 16 June 2008 |
Core clock speed | 1395 MHz vs 1242 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 100.8 GTexel/s vs 36.9 billion / sec |
Pipelines | 896 vs 192 |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 65 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt vs 182 Watt |
Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 896 MB |
Memory clock speed | 10002 MHz vs 999 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3750 vs 1208 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 307 vs 53 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 28933 vs 19512 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 849.116 vs 477.327 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3354 vs 3342 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3354 vs 3342 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce MX450
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce MX450 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3750 | 1208 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 307 | 53 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 28933 | 19512 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 849.116 | 477.327 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6326 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3710 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3354 | 3342 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6326 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3710 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3354 | 3342 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2114 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.664 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.906 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 29.525 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce MX450 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Turing | Tesla 2.0 |
Code name | N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1 | GT200 |
Launch date | 1 Aug 2020 | 16 June 2008 |
Place in performance rating | 524 | 1396 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Launch price (MSRP) | $449 | |
Price now | $95.38 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 13.70 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1575 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 1395 MHz | 1242 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 65 nm |
Pipelines | 896 | 192 |
Texture fill rate | 100.8 GTexel/s | 36.9 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 182 Watt |
Transistor count | 4700 million | 1,400 million |
CUDA cores | 192 | |
Floating-point performance | 476.9 gflops | |
Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video, Dual Link DVIHDTV |
Audio input for HDMI | S / PDIF | |
HDMI | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 4.0 x4 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | 2x 6-pin |
Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
Length | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) | |
SLI options | 2-way3-way | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.1 | 10.0 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
Shader Model | 6.5 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 896 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 64.03 GB/s | 111.9 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 448 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 10002 MHz | 999 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5, GDDR6 | GDDR3 |
Technologies |
||
GPU Boost | ||
Optimus | ||
3D Vision | ||
CUDA | ||
SLI |