GeForce GT 415M vs MX110

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX110 and GeForce GT 415M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce MX110
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
3.71
+401%

MX110 outperforms GT 415M by a whopping 401% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7101160
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency8.484.23
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGM108SGF108
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date17 November 2017 (7 years ago)3 September 2010 (14 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 cores25648
Core clock speed978 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed1006 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,020 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt12 Watt
Texture fill rate16.104.000
Floating-point processing power0.5151 TFLOPS0.096 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs168

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x4PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB512 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth40.1 GB/s25.6 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.7 (5.1)5.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.01.1
Vulkan1.3N/A
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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.

GeForce MX110 3.71
+401%
GT 415M 0.74

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.

GeForce MX110 1431
+400%
GT 415M 286

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.

GeForce MX110 2121
+460%
GT 415M 379

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.

GeForce MX110 4271
+469%
GT 415M 751

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 HD17
+467%
3−4
−467%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9
+80%
5−6
−80%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Battlefield 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Far Cry 5 10
+900%
1−2
−900%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Hitman 3 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+136%
10−12
−136%
Metro Exodus 13
+550%
2−3
−550%
Red Dead Redemption 2 13 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16
+167%
6−7
−167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+35.5%
30−35
−35.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12
+140%
5−6
−140%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Battlefield 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Far Cry 5 8
+700%
1−2
−700%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Hitman 3 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+136%
10−12
−136%
Metro Exodus 5 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+35.5%
30−35
−35.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Far Cry 5 6
+500%
1−2
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Hitman 3 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+136%
10−12
−136%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
−100%
10−11
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+35.5%
30−35
−35.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4 0−1
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

This is how GeForce MX110 and GT 415M compete in popular games:

  • GeForce MX110 is 467% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GeForce MX110 is 1050% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 415M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GeForce MX110 is ahead in 34 tests (97%)
  • GT 415M is ahead in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.71 0.74
Recency 17 November 2017 3 September 2010
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 12 Watt

GeForce MX110 has a 401.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 415M, on the other hand, has 150% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX110 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 415M in performance tests.


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

Vote for your favorite

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


NVIDIA GeForce MX110
GeForce MX110
NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M
GeForce GT 415M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.3 2280 votes

Rate GeForce MX110 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 25 votes

Rate GeForce GT 415M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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