GeForce GTS 150M vs 320M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 320M and GeForce GTS 150M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce 320M
2010
23 Watt
0.54

GTS 150M outperforms GeForce 320M by a whopping 143% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in performance ranking1190998
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGT2xx (2009−2012)G9x (2007−2010)
GPU code nameMCP89N10E-GE1
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 April 2010 (14 years ago)2 March 2009 (15 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores3264
CUDA coresno data64
Core clock speed450 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistors486 million505 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate7.20012.80
Floating-point performance0.0912 gflops0.128 gflops
Gigaflopsno data192

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
SLI options-2-way
MXM Typeno dataMXM 3.0 Type-B

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeno dataGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared1 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno dataUp to 800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data51 GB/s
Shared memory+-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsDisplayPortHDMIDual Link DVILVDSSingle Link DVIVGA
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model4.14.0
OpenGL3.32.1
OpenCLN/A1.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce 320M 0.54
GTS 150M 1.31
+143%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GeForce 320M 209
GTS 150M 504
+141%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD17
−135%
40−45
+135%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−10%
30−35
+10%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−10%
30−35
+10%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−10%
30−35
+10%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 1−2
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 1−2

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

This is how GeForce 320M and GTS 150M compete in popular games:

  • GTS 150M is 135% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTS 150M is 500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTS 150M is ahead in 32 tests (70%)
  • there's a draw in 14 tests (30%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.54 1.31
Recency 1 April 2010 2 March 2009
Chip lithography 40 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 45 Watt

GeForce 320M has an age advantage of 1 year, a 37.5% more advanced lithography process, and 95.7% lower power consumption.

GTS 150M, on the other hand, has a 142.6% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GTS 150M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 320M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 320M
GeForce 320M
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 150M
GeForce GTS 150M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 51 vote

Rate GeForce 320M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 2 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 150M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.