GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition vs MX150

Place in the ranking	592	737
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	40.61	2.33
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	GP108	GK104
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	17 May 2017 (7 years ago)	8 November 2013 (11 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	1344
Core clock speed	937 MHz	797 MHz
Boost clock speed	1038 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,800 million	3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	100 Watt
Texture fill rate	24.91	89.26
Floating-point processing power	0.7972 TFLOPS	2.142 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	32
TMUs	24	112

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	MXM-B (3.0)
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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	40.1 GB/s	160.0 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

API compatibility

List of supported 3D 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	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.1.126
CUDA	6.1	3.0

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 +85.7%	14−16 −85.7%
1440p	28 +75%	16−18 −75%
4K	20 +100%	10−12 −100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Elden Ring	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	15 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	9 +80%	5−6 −80%
Forza Horizon 4	27 +92.9%	14−16 −92.9%
Metro Exodus	18 +80%	10−11 −80%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27 +92.9%	14−16 −92.9%
Valorant	24 +100%	12−14 −100%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21 +75%	12−14 −75%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	3 +200%	1−2 −200%
Dota 2	40 +90.5%	21−24 −90.5%
Elden Ring	13 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Far Cry 5	42 +75%	24−27 −75%
Fortnite	29 +81.3%	16−18 −81.3%
Forza Horizon 4	21 +75%	12−14 −75%
Grand Theft Auto V	26 +85.7%	14−16 −85.7%
Metro Exodus	11 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	56 +86.7%	30−33 −86.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +88.9%	9−10 −88.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	22 +83.3%	12−14 −83.3%
Valorant	17 +88.9%	9−10 −88.9%
World of Tanks	87 +93.3%	45−50 −93.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14 +75%	8−9 −75%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Dota 2	62 +77.1%	35−40 −77.1%
Far Cry 5	26 +85.7%	14−16 −85.7%
Forza Horizon 4	16 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	19 +90%	10−11 −90%
Valorant	16−18 +88.9%	9−10 −88.9%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Elden Ring	5 +150%	2−3 −150%
Grand Theft Auto V	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	43 +79.2%	24−27 −79.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
World of Tanks	55 +83.3%	30−33 −83.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Valorant	16−18 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +88.9%	9−10 −88.9%
Elden Ring	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +88.9%	9−10 −88.9%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21 +75%	12−14 −75%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +88.9%	9−10 −88.9%
World of Tanks	30 +87.5%	16−18 −87.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Dota 2	24 +100%	12−14 −100%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Fortnite	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Valorant	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%

This is how GeForce MX150 and GTX 775M Mac Edition compete in popular games:

GeForce MX150 is 86% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX150 is 75% faster in 1440p
GeForce MX150 is 100% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.90	3.38
Recency	17 May 2017	8 November 2013
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	100 Watt

GeForce MX150 has a 74.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 900% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX150 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition in performance tests.

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