GeForce MX450 vs 8800 GS

Place in performance ranking	1094	428
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.01	no data
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code name	G92	N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	31 January 2008 (16 years ago)	1 August 2020 (3 years ago)
Current price	$145	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores	96	896
Core clock speed	550 MHz	1395 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1575 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	105 Watt	25 Watt (12 - 29 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate	26.40	100.8
Floating-point performance	264 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce 8800 GS and GeForce MX450 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Interface	PCIe 1.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Length	229 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	None

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 type	GDDR3	GDDR5, GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	384 MB	2 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1600 MHz	10000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	38.4 GB/s	64.03 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

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 Connectors

2x DVI, 1x S-Video

No outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	4.0	6.5
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
CUDA	1.1	7.5

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.

8800 GS 0.85

GeForce MX450 9.67
+1038%

MX450 outperforms 8800 GS by 1038% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

8800 GS 330

GeForce MX450 3733
+1031%

MX450 outperforms 8800 GS by 1031% in Passmark.

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 HD	2−3 −1350%	29 +1350%
1440p	1−2 −1600%	17 +1600%
4K	2−3 −1100%	24 +1100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

−994%

350−400
+994%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	20−22 −1000%	220−230 +1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10 −1000%	110−120 +1000%
Battlefield 5	30−33 −900%	300−310 +900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 −1000%	220−230 +1000%
Cyberpunk 2077	22 −1036%	250−260 +1036%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −1036%	250−260 +1036%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 −1011%	300−310 +1011%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −964%	500−550 +964%
Hitman 3	30 −900%	300−310 +900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	56 −971%	600−650 +971%
Metro Exodus	55 −991%	600−650 +991%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45 −1011%	500−550 +1011%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	50 −1000%	550−600 +1000%
Watch Dogs: Legion	25 −1020%	280−290 +1020%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	20−22 −1000%	220−230 +1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6 −983%	65−70 +983%
Battlefield 5	30−33 −900%	300−310 +900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 −1000%	220−230 +1000%
Cyberpunk 2077	13 −977%	140−150 +977%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −1036%	250−260 +1036%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 −1011%	300−310 +1011%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −964%	500−550 +964%
Hitman 3	20 −1000%	220−230 +1000%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 −998%	450−500 +998%
Metro Exodus	33 −961%	350−400 +961%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35 −900%	350−400 +900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40 −1025%	450−500 +1025%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	33 −961%	350−400 +961%
Watch Dogs: Legion	89 −1024%	1000−1050 +1024%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	20−22 −1000%	220−230 +1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	11 −991%	120−130 +991%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 −1000%	220−230 +1000%
Cyberpunk 2077	8 −1025%	90−95 +1025%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −1036%	250−260 +1036%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −964%	500−550 +964%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24 −1025%	270−280 +1025%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30 −900%	300−310 +900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20 −1000%	220−230 +1000%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7 −971%	75−80 +971%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

−1029%

350−400
+1029%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −1005%	210−220 +1005%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 −1025%	180−190 +1025%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7 −971%	75−80 +971%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −983%	130−140 +983%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −1000%	55−60 +1000%
Far Cry 5	20 −1000%	220−230 +1000%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −1011%	200−210 +1011%
Hitman 3	18 −1011%	200−210 +1011%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 −1000%	220−230 +1000%
Metro Exodus	14−16 −971%	150−160 +971%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18 −1011%	200−210 +1011%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%
Watch Dogs: Legion	5 −1000%	55−60 +1000%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

−1015%

290−300
+1015%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 −971%	75−80 +971%
Hitman 3	6−7 −983%	65−70 +983%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −1000%	110−120 +1000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −1000%	55−60 +1000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −971%	75−80 +971%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −983%	65−70 +983%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −1025%	45−50 +1025%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −1025%	45−50 +1025%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −1000%	55−60 +1000%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −983%	130−140 +983%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −1000%	110−120 +1000%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −1000%	110−120 +1000%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 −900%	30−33 +900%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
−1011%

100−105

+1011%

This is how 8800 GS and GeForce MX450 compete in popular games:

GeForce MX450 is 1350% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX450 is 1600% faster in 1440p
GeForce MX450 is 1100% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.85	9.67
Recency	31 January 2008	1 August 2020
Maximum RAM amount	384 MB	2 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	105 Watt	25 Watt