MX130 vs GTX 950M

#ad
Buy
VS
#ad
Buy

Combined performance score

GTX 950M
6.67
+39%

GTX 950M outperforms MX130 by 39% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking527603
Place by popularitynot in top-10092
Value for money0.801.51
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameN16P-GTN16S-GTR
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date12 March 2015 (9 years old)1 January 2018 (6 years old)
Current price$797 $899
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GeForce MX130 has 89% better value for money than GTX 950M.

Technical specs

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 cores640384
CUDA cores640no data
Core clock speed914 MHz1122 MHz
Boost clock speed1124 MHz1242 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt15-25 Watt
Texture fill rate44.9629.81
Floating-point performance1,439 gflops953.9 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 950M and GeForce MX130 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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.

Laptop sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options+no data

Memory

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 typeDDR3 or GDDR5DDR3, GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 or 2500 MHz5012 MHz
Memory bandwidth32 or 80 GB/s40.1 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 outputsNo outputs
VGA аnalog display support+no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no data
HDMI+no data

Technologies

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

GameStream+no data
GeForce ShadowPlay+no data
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+no data
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+no data
Optimus++
BatteryBoost+no data
Ansel+no data

API support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
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.

GTX 950M 6.67
+39%
GeForce MX130 4.80

GTX 950M outperforms MX130 by 39% in our combined 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%

GTX 950M 2586
+39.1%
GeForce MX130 1859

GTX 950M outperforms MX130 by 39% in Passmark.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 950M 15710
+31.3%
GeForce MX130 11968

GTX 950M outperforms MX130 by 31% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 950M 4367
+51.9%
GeForce MX130 2875

GTX 950M outperforms MX130 by 52% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 950M 3200
+36.5%
GeForce MX130 2345

GTX 950M outperforms MX130 by 36% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 950M 21356
+56.9%
GeForce MX130 13610

GTX 950M outperforms MX130 by 57% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GTX 950M 9543
+48.6%
GeForce MX130 6424

GTX 950M outperforms MX130 by 49% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

GTX 950M 198867
+16.6%
GeForce MX130 170596

GTX 950M outperforms MX130 by 17% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

GTX 950M 7440
+48.7%
GeForce MX130 5003

GTX 950M outperforms MX130 by 49% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 950M 9777
+42.3%
GeForce MX130 6872

GTX 950M outperforms MX130 by 42% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 950M 42
+50.9%
GeForce MX130 28

GTX 950M outperforms MX130 by 51% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.

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 HD30
+66.7%
18
−66.7%
1440p21
+50%
14−16
−50%
4K16
+60%
10−12
−60%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+175%
4
−175%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 23
+156%
9−10
−156%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Battlefield 5 31
+121%
14−16
−121%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 23
+64.3%
14
−64.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 22
+120%
10−11
−120%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+53.3%
14−16
−53.3%
Hitman 3 16−18
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+18.2%
11
−18.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 19
+46.2%
13
−46.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
−10%
11
+10%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 19
+111%
9−10
−111%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Battlefield 5 26
+85.7%
14−16
−85.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 21
+61.5%
13
−61.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 20
+100%
10−11
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+53.3%
14−16
−53.3%
Hitman 3 16−18
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Metro Exodus 5
+66.7%
3
−66.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 15
+25%
12−14
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+35.7%
14
−35.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 11
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Battlefield 5 20
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 19
+58.3%
12
−58.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 19
+90%
10−11
−90%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+53.3%
14−16
−53.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+57.1%
7
−57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Hitman 3 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Battlefield 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 12
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Hitman 3 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Battlefield 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 6
+20%
5−6
−20%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

This is how GTX 950M and GeForce MX130 compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • GTX 950M is 66.7% faster than GeForce MX130

1440p resolution:

  • GTX 950M is 50% faster than GeForce MX130

4K resolution:

  • GTX 950M is 60% faster than GeForce MX130

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

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 950M is 200% faster than the GeForce MX130.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX130 is 10% faster than the GTX 950M.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 950M is ahead in 59 tests (97%)
  • GeForce MX130 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 6.67 4.80
Recency 12 March 2015 1 January 2018
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 15 Watt

The GeForce GTX 950M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX130 in performance tests.


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

User ratings

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


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
GeForce GTX 950M
NVIDIA GeForce MX130
GeForce MX130

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User ratings: view and submit

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


3.6 919 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 2015 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce MX130 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

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