Radeon 540X vs GeForce GTS 150M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTS 150M and Radeon 540X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
540X outperforms GTS 150M by a whopping 217% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1098 | 756 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.07 | 5.91 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) |
| GPU code name | G94 | Lexa |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 3 March 2009 (17 years ago) | 5 September 2018 (7 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 | 64 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 400 MHz | 980 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1046 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 505 million | 2,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 12.80 | 33.47 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.128 TFLOPS | 1.071 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | 192 | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 32 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 64 KB | 512 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 | large | no data |
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
| SLI options | 2-way | - |
| MXM Type | MXM 3.0 Type-B | no data |
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 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 800 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 51 GB/s | 48 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 | DisplayPortHDMIDual Link DVILVDSSingle Link DVIVGA | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | 8.0 | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | + | - |
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:
| Full HD | 5−6
−280%
| 19
+280%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−200%
|
9
+200%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 0−1 | 9 |
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−2500%
|
26
+2500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−167%
|
8−9
+167%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−450%
|
10−12
+450%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−1967%
|
62
+1967%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−171%
|
18−20
+171%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−1600%
|
17
+1600%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−77.8%
|
16−18
+77.8%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−60.6%
|
50−55
+60.6%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−1900%
|
20
+1900%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 27−30
−96.4%
|
55
+96.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−167%
|
8−9
+167%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−194%
|
47
+194%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−450%
|
10−12
+450%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−633%
|
22
+633%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−171%
|
18−20
+171%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
−200%
|
6
+200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−77.8%
|
16−18
+77.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−129%
|
16
+129%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−60.6%
|
50−55
+60.6%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−1700%
|
18
+1700%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−167%
|
8−9
+167%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−175%
|
44
+175%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−450%
|
10−12
+450%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−171%
|
18−20
+171%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−77.8%
|
16−18
+77.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10
+42.9%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−60.6%
|
50−55
+60.6%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−467%
|
17
+467%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−100%
|
8−9
+100%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 8−9
−263%
|
27−30
+263%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−146%
|
30−35
+146%
|
| Valorant | 3−4
−1233%
|
40−45
+1233%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−600%
|
7−8
+600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−200%
|
9−10
+200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−217%
|
18−20
+217%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 17
+0%
|
17
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Counter-Strike 2 | 17
+0%
|
17
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5
+0%
|
5
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 15
+0%
|
15
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
This is how GTS 150M and Radeon 540X compete in popular games:
- Radeon 540X is 280% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 540X is 2500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Radeon 540X performs better in 43 tests (83%)
- there's a draw in 9 tests (17%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.21 | 3.84 |
| Recency | 3 March 2009 | 5 September 2018 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 50 Watt |
GTS 150M has 11% lower power consumption.
Radeon 540X, on the other hand, has a 217% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 364% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon 540X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 150M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
