Radeon PRO W7800 vs GeForce GTS 150M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTS 150M with Radeon PRO W7800, including specs and performance data.

GTS 150M
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 45 Watt
1.21

PRO W7800 outperforms GTS 150M by a whopping 5336% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking109828
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data13.34
Power efficiency2.0719.48
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameG94Navi 31
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date3 March 2009 (17 years ago)13 April 2023 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores644480
Core clock speed400 MHz1895 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2525 MHz
Number of transistors505 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt260 Watt
Texture fill rate12.80707.0
Floating-point processing power0.128 TFLOPS45.25 TFLOPS
Gigaflops192no data
ROPs16128
TMUs32280
Ray Tracing Coresno data70
L0 Cacheno data2.2 MB
L1 Cacheno data2 MB
L2 Cache64 KB6 MB
L3 Cacheno data64 MB

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data280 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 8-pin
SLI options2-way-
MXM TypeMXM 3.0 Type-Bno 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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB32 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 800 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth51 GB/s576.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 ConnectorsDisplayPortHDMIDual Link DVILVDSSingle Link DVIVGA3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no data

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.8
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.12.2
VulkanN/A1.3
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.

GTS 150M 1.21
PRO W7800 65.77
+5336%

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.

GTS 150M 504
Samples: 1
PRO W7800 27502
+5357%
Samples: 37

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−5233%
160−170
+5233%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 0−1 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 1−2
−4900%
50−55
+4900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−5233%
160−170
+5233%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−4900%
100−105
+4900%
Fortnite 3−4
−5233%
160−170
+5233%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−4900%
350−400
+4900%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−4900%
50−55
+4900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−4900%
450−500
+4900%
Valorant 30−35
−5203%
1750−1800
+5203%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 1−2
−4900%
50−55
+4900%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
−5257%
1500−1550
+5257%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−5233%
160−170
+5233%
Dota 2 16−18
−5213%
850−900
+5213%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−4900%
100−105
+4900%
Fortnite 3−4
−5233%
160−170
+5233%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−4900%
350−400
+4900%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−4900%
50−55
+4900%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−4900%
100−105
+4900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−4900%
450−500
+4900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−4900%
350−400
+4900%
Valorant 30−35
−5203%
1750−1800
+5203%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
−4900%
50−55
+4900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−5233%
160−170
+5233%
Dota 2 16−18
−5213%
850−900
+5213%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−4900%
100−105
+4900%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−4900%
350−400
+4900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−4900%
450−500
+4900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−4900%
350−400
+4900%
Valorant 30−35
−5203%
1750−1800
+5203%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
−5233%
160−170
+5233%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
−5150%
210−220
+5150%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 8−9
−4900%
400−450
+4900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−5285%
700−750
+5285%
Valorant 3−4
−5233%
160−170
+5233%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2
−4900%
50−55
+4900%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−5233%
160−170
+5233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−4900%
100−105
+4900%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−4900%
100−105
+4900%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−5257%
750−800
+5257%
Valorant 6−7
−4900%
300−310
+4900%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 1−2
−4900%
50−55
+4900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−4900%
100−105
+4900%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−4900%
100−105
+4900%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.21 65.77
Recency 3 March 2009 13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 260 Watt

GTS 150M has 478% lower power consumption.

PRO W7800, on the other hand, has a 5336% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7800 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 150M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTS 150M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon PRO W7800 is a workstation one.

Other comparisons

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 2 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 40 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTS 150M or Radeon PRO W7800, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.