GeForce GTX 485M vs MX150

Place in performance ranking	557	550
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.14	3.43
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	N17S-G1	N12E-GTX-A1
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	16 May 2017 (7 years ago)	6 January 2010 (14 years ago)
Current price	$1049	$163

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 485M has 201% better value for money than GeForce MX150.

Detailed specifications

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	384
Core clock speed	1468 MHz	1150 MHz
Boost clock speed	1532 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,800 million	1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt (10 - 25 Watt TGP)	100 Watt
Texture fill rate	24.91	36.8 billion/sec
Floating-point performance	1,127 gflops	883.2 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce MX150 and GeForce GTX 485M 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
Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
SLI options	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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	6008 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	40.1 GB/s	96.0 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	No outputs
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
CUDA	6.1	+

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 5.90

GTX 485M 6.11
+3.6%

GTX 485M outperforms MX150 by 4% based on our aggregate 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 2278

GTX 485M 2359
+3.6%

GTX 485M outperforms MX150 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
+65.9%

GTX 485M 2709

MX150 outperforms GTX 485M by 66% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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%

GeForce MX150 10992

GTX 485M 13536
+23.1%

GTX 485M outperforms MX150 by 23% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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:

900p	45−50 −6.7%	48 +6.7%
Full HD	28 −118%	61 +118%
1440p	30 +0%	30−35 +0%
4K	21 +0%	21−24 +0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−11

+0%

10−11

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	19 +46.2%	12−14 −46.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Battlefield 5	26 +52.9%	16−18 −52.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21 +61.5%	12−14 −61.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +10%	10−11 −10%
Far Cry 5	20 +53.8%	12−14 −53.8%
Far Cry New Dawn	24 +41.2%	16−18 −41.2%
Forza Horizon 4	25 −16%	27−30 +16%
Hitman 3	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	36 +24.1%	27−30 −24.1%
Metro Exodus	23 +53.3%	14−16 −53.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27 +58.8%	16−18 −58.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27 +35%	20−22 −35%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14 −78.6%	24−27 +78.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	13 +0%	12−14 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Battlefield 5	18 +5.9%	16−18 −5.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −8.3%	12−14 +8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	7 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
Far Cry 5	18 +38.5%	12−14 −38.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	9 −88.9%	16−18 +88.9%
Forza Horizon 4	71 +145%	27−30 −145%
Hitman 3	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100 +245%	27−30 −245%
Metro Exodus	17 +13.3%	14−16 −13.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20 +17.6%	16−18 −17.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21 +5%	20−22 −5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	19 +46.2%	12−14 −46.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7 −85.7%	12−14 +85.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 −8.3%	12−14 +8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Far Cry 5	12 −8.3%	12−14 +8.3%
Forza Horizon 4	14 −107%	27−30 +107%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16 −81.3%	27−30 +81.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16 −25%	20−22 +25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	11 −18.2%	12−14 +18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18

−6.3%

16−18
+6.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 −10%	10−12 +10%
Hitman 3	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11

−10%

10−12
+10%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hitman 3	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6−7 +0%	6−7 +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	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

+0%

6−7

+0%

This is how GeForce MX150 and GTX 485M compete in popular games:

GTX 485M is 7% faster in 900p
GTX 485M is 118% faster in 1080p
A tie in 1440p
A tie in 4K

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

in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce MX150 is 245% faster.
in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 485M is 107% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GeForce MX150 is ahead in 18 tests (25%)
GTX 485M is ahead in 24 tests (34%)
there's a draw in 29 tests (41%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.90	6.11
Recency	16 May 2017	6 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt	100 Watt