Quadro NVS 150M vs GeForce GT 650M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GT 650M with Quadro NVS 150M, including specs and performance data.
650M outperforms 150M by a whopping 1581% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 816 | 1458 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Power efficiency | 4.81 | 1.29 |
Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
GPU code name | GK107 | G98 |
Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
Release date | 22 March 2012 (13 years ago) | 15 August 2008 (17 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
Pipelines / CUDA cores | 384 | 8 |
Core clock speed | Up to 900 MHz | 530 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 950 MHz | no data |
Number of transistors | 1,270 million | 210 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 65 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 10 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 30.40 | 2.120 |
Floating-point processing power | 0.7296 TFLOPS | 0.0208 TFLOPS |
ROPs | 16 | 4 |
TMUs | 32 | 4 |
L1 Cache | 32 KB | no data |
L2 Cache | 256 KB | 16 KB |
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 size | medium sized | no data |
Bus support | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | no data |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-I |
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 | DDR3\GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 256 MB |
Memory bus width | 128bit | 64 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 700 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | Up to 80.0 GB/s | 11.2 GB/s |
Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
HDMI | + | - |
HDCP | + | - |
Maximum VGA resolution | Up to 2048x1536 | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
3D Blu-Ray | + | - |
Optimus | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12 API | 11.1 (10_0) |
Shader Model | 5.1 | 4.0 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 3.3 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
Vulkan | 1.1.126 | N/A |
CUDA | + | 1.1 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.
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:
900p | 31
+3000%
| 1−2
−3000%
|
Full HD | 32
+3100%
| 1−2
−3100%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
Full HD
Medium
Battlefield 5 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
Far Cry 5 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
Fortnite | 14−16 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+367%
|
3−4
−367%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+85.7%
|
7−8
−85.7%
|
Valorant | 45−50
+84%
|
24−27
−84%
|
Full HD
High
Battlefield 5 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 72
+555%
|
10−12
−555%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
Dota 2 | 27−30
+250%
|
8−9
−250%
|
Far Cry 5 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
Fortnite | 14−16 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+367%
|
3−4
−367%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
Grand Theft Auto V | 8−9 | 0−1 |
Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
Metro Exodus | 5−6 | 0−1 |
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+85.7%
|
7−8
−85.7%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
Valorant | 45−50
+84%
|
24−27
−84%
|
Full HD
Ultra
Battlefield 5 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
Dota 2 | 27−30
+250%
|
8−9
−250%
|
Far Cry 5 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+367%
|
3−4
−367%
|
Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+85.7%
|
7−8
−85.7%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
Valorant | 45−50
+84%
|
24−27
−84%
|
Full HD
Epic
Fortnite | 14−16 | 0−1 |
1440p
High
Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
+2000%
|
1−2
−2000%
|
Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
+1150%
|
2−3
−1150%
|
Valorant | 27−30
+2600%
|
1−2
−2600%
|
1440p
Ultra
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
Hogwarts Legacy | 3−4 | 0−1 |
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic
Fortnite | 5−6 | 0−1 |
4K
High
Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
Valorant | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
4K
Ultra
Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Dota 2 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
4K
Epic
Fortnite | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
This is how GT 650M and NVS 150M compete in popular games:
- GT 650M is 3000% faster in 900p
- GT 650M is 3100% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GT 650M is 1300% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GT 650M surpassed NVS 150M in all 29 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 2.69 | 0.16 |
Recency | 22 March 2012 | 15 August 2008 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 256 MB |
Chip lithography | 28 nm | 65 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 10 Watt |
GT 650M has a 1581.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.
NVS 150M, on the other hand, has 350% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GT 650M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 150M in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GT 650M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro NVS 150M is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.