GeForce 9800 GT vs MX150

Place in the ranking	593	1041
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.07
Power efficiency	40.71	0.68
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GP108	G92
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	17 May 2017 (7 years ago)	21 July 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$160

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	112
Core clock speed	937 MHz	600 MHz
Boost clock speed	1038 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,800 million	754 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	105 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105 °C
Texture fill rate	24.91	33.60
Floating-point processing power	0.7972 TFLOPS	0.336 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	24	56

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	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	229 mm
Height	no data	1-slot
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 6-pin
SLI options	-	+

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	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	40.1 GB/s	57.6 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	HDTVDual Link DVI
Multi monitor support	no data	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	S/PDIF

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.4	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	2.1
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
CUDA	6.1	+

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 MX150 5.90
+376%

9800 GT 1.24

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 MX150 2269
+375%

9800 GT 478

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	26 +420%	5−6 −420%
1440p	28 +460%	5−6 −460%
4K	20 +400%	4−5 −400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	32.00
1440p	no data	32.00
4K	no data	40.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Elden Ring	14−16 +400%	3−4 −400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	15 +400%	3−4 −400%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Cyberpunk 2077	9 +800%	1−2 −800%
Forza Horizon 4	27 +440%	5−6 −440%
Metro Exodus	18 +500%	3−4 −500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27 +440%	5−6 −440%
Valorant	24 +380%	5−6 −380%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21 +425%	4−5 −425%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Cyberpunk 2077	3	0−1
Dota 2	40 +400%	8−9 −400%
Elden Ring	13 +550%	2−3 −550%
Far Cry 5	42 +425%	8−9 −425%
Fortnite	29 +383%	6−7 −383%
Forza Horizon 4	21 +425%	4−5 −425%
Grand Theft Auto V	26 +420%	5−6 −420%
Metro Exodus	11 +450%	2−3 −450%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	56 +460%	10−11 −460%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	22 +450%	4−5 −450%
Valorant	17 +467%	3−4 −467%
World of Tanks	87 +383%	18−20 −383%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14 +600%	2−3 −600%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Dota 2	62 +417%	12−14 −417%
Far Cry 5	26 +420%	5−6 −420%
Forza Horizon 4	16 +433%	3−4 −433%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	19 +533%	3−4 −533%
Valorant	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Elden Ring	5 +400%	1−2 −400%
Grand Theft Auto V	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	43 +378%	9−10 −378%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
World of Tanks	55 +450%	10−11 −450%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Valorant	16−18 +433%	3−4 −433%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%
Elden Ring	3−4	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21 +425%	4−5 −425%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%
World of Tanks	30 +400%	6−7 −400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Dota 2	24 +380%	5−6 −380%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Fortnite	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Valorant	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%

This is how GeForce MX150 and 9800 GT compete in popular games:

GeForce MX150 is 420% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX150 is 460% faster in 1440p
GeForce MX150 is 400% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.90	1.24
Recency	17 May 2017	21 July 2008
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	105 Watt

GeForce MX150 has a 375.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 950% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX150 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9800 GT in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX150 is a notebook card while GeForce 9800 GT is a desktop one.

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