GeForce 9700M GT vs MX130

Place in the ranking	640	1229
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2018)	G9x (2007−2010)
GPU code name	N16S-GTR	NB9E-GE
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 January 2018 (6 years ago)	3 June 2008 (16 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	32
CUDA cores	no data	32
Core clock speed	1122 MHz	625 MHz
Boost clock speed	1242 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	no data	314 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15-25 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	29.81	10.00
Floating-point processing power	0.9539 gflops	0.0992 gflops
Gigaflops	no data	148

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	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-II
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	DDR3, GDDR5	GDDR2, GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	40.1 GB/s	25.6 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 Connectors

No 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 graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/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 MX130 4.77
+783%

9700M GT 0.54

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 MX130 1838
+784%

9700M GT 208

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.

GeForce MX130 11968
+584%

9700M GT 1750

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

18
+800%

2−3

−800%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4
+33.3%

3−4

−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6	0−1
Battlefield 5	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Far Cry 5	14 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +1200%	1−2 −1200%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +900%	3−4 −900%
Hitman 3	9 +80%	5−6 −80%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +210%	10−11 −210%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +1200%	1−2 −1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	26 +333%	6−7 −333%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +53.3%	30−33 −53.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6	0−1
Battlefield 5	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Far Cry 5	11 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +1200%	1−2 −1200%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +900%	3−4 −900%
Hitman 3	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +210%	10−11 −210%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +1200%	1−2 −1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16 +167%	6−7 −167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +70%	10−11 −70%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +53.3%	30−33 −53.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Far Cry 5	8	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +900%	3−4 −900%
Hitman 3	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	13 +30%	10−11 −30%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14 +133%	6−7 −133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +53.3%	30−33 −53.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14
+1200%

1−2

−1200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Hitman 3	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 +2900%	1−2 −2900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
+200%

3−4

−200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4	0−1
Hitman 3	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6	0−1
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2	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	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	4−5	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 MX130 and 9700M GT compete in popular games:

GeForce MX130 is 800% 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 MX130 is 2900% faster.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the 9700M GT is 43% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GeForce MX130 is ahead in 34 tests (97%)
9700M GT is ahead in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.77	0.54
Recency	1 January 2018	3 June 2008
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	45 Watt

GeForce MX130 has a 783.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX130 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9700M GT in performance tests.

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