FirePro W5170M vs GeForce MX150

Place in performance ranking	554	563
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Value for money	1.21	0.22
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GCN (2011−2017)
GPU code name	N17S-G1	Tropo
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	16 May 2017 (6 years ago)	2 October 2015 (8 years ago)
Current price	$1049	$1530

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GeForce MX150 has 450% better value for money than W5170M.

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 cores	384	640
Core clock speed	1468 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1532 MHz	925 MHz
Number of transistors	1,800 million	1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt (10 - 25 Watt TGP)	no data
Texture fill rate	24.91	37.00
Floating-point performance	1,127 gflops	1,184 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on GeForce MX150 and FirePro W5170M 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 size	large	large
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-A (3.0)
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	6008 MHz	4500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	40.1 GB/s	72 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 Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
Eyefinity	no data	+

Technologies

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

AppAcceleration

no data

API support

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_1)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
CUDA	6.1	no data

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.

GeForce MX150 5.88
+3.9%

W5170M 5.66

GeForce MX150 outperforms FirePro W5170M by 4% based on our aggregated 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%

GeForce MX150 2276
+3.9%

W5170M 2191

GeForce MX150 outperforms FirePro W5170M by 4% in Passmark.

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%

GeForce MX150 4494
+7.1%

W5170M 4197

GeForce MX150 outperforms FirePro W5170M by 7% 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%

GeForce MX150 3488
+19.9%

W5170M 2909

GeForce MX150 outperforms FirePro W5170M by 20% 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%

GeForce MX150 19132
+0.2%

W5170M 19095

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%

GeForce MX150 9414
+13%

W5170M 8330

GeForce MX150 outperforms FirePro W5170M by 13% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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	27 +0%	27 +0%
1440p	24 +14.3%	21−24 −14.3%
4K	19 +5.6%	18−20 −5.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−11
+11.1%

9−10

−11.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	19 +72.7%	10−12 −72.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Battlefield 5	39 +129%	16−18 −129%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	22 +29.4%	16−18 −29.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +22.2%	9−10 −22.2%
Far Cry 5	17 +41.7%	12−14 −41.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	18 +38.5%	12−14 −38.5%
Forza Horizon 4	25 +31.6%	18−20 −31.6%
Hitman 3	14−16 +7.7%	12−14 −7.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12 +9.1%	10−12 −9.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14 +40%	10−11 −40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	17 +21.4%	14−16 −21.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14 +75%	8−9 −75%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	13 +18.2%	10−12 −18.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Battlefield 5	32 +88.2%	16−18 −88.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7 −143%	16−18 +143%
Cyberpunk 2077	7 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Far Cry 5	16 +33.3%	12−14 −33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	17 +30.8%	12−14 −30.8%
Forza Horizon 4	21 +10.5%	18−20 −10.5%
Hitman 3	14−16 +7.7%	12−14 −7.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Metro Exodus	6 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	11 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	19 +26.7%	15 −26.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	11 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7 −57.1%	10−12 +57.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Battlefield 5	26 +52.9%	16−18 −52.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Far Cry 5	14 +16.7%	12−14 −16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	15 +15.4%	12−14 −15.4%
Forza Horizon 4	14 −35.7%	18−20 +35.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	11 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Hitman 3	10 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

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

4K
High Preset

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

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

This is how GeForce MX150 and W5170M compete in popular games:

W5170M is 0% faster than GeForce MX150 in 1080p
GeForce MX150 is 14.3% faster than W5170M in 1440p
GeForce MX150 is 5.6% faster than W5170M in 4K

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

in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX150 is 129% faster than the W5170M.
in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the W5170M is 143% faster than the GeForce MX150.

All in all, in popular games: