HD Graphics 5000 vs GeForce MX150

Place in the ranking	590	973
Place by popularity	100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	40.93	3.53
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Generation 7.5 (2013)
GPU code name	GP108	Haswell GT3
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	17 May 2017 (7 years ago)	27 May 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	320
Core clock speed	937 MHz	200 MHz
Boost clock speed	1038 MHz	1000 MHz
Number of transistors	1,800 million	1,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	22 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	30 Watt
Texture fill rate	24.91	40.00
Floating-point processing power	0.7972 TFLOPS	0.64 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	4
TMUs	24	40

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	Ring Bus
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	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	64 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	40.1 GB/s	no data
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

Portable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D 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	4.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	+
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 5.88
+287%

HD Graphics 5000 1.52

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 2270
+287%

HD Graphics 5000 586

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.

GeForce MX150 4494
+335%

HD Graphics 5000 1034

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 MX150 10992
+157%

HD Graphics 5000 4277

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.

GeForce MX150 3488
+387%

HD Graphics 5000 716

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.

GeForce MX150 19132
+236%

HD Graphics 5000 5694

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GeForce MX150 223740
+239%

HD Graphics 5000 65904

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

GeForce MX150 42
+245%

HD Graphics 5000 12

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 +160%	10 −160%
1440p	30 +329%	7−8 −329%
4K	20 +300%	5−6 −300%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−11
+150%

4−5

−150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	19 +217%	6−7 −217%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Battlefield 5	26 +333%	6−7 −333%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21 +425%	4−5 −425%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +175%	4−5 −175%
Far Cry 5	20 +900%	2−3 −900%
Far Cry New Dawn	24 +700%	3−4 −700%
Forza Horizon 4	80 +2567%	3−4 −2567%
Hitman 3	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100 +567%	14−16 −567%
Metro Exodus	23 +360%	5−6 −360%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27 +1250%	2−3 −1250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	36 +350%	8−9 −350%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +51.5%	30−35 −51.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21 +250%	6−7 −250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Battlefield 5	18 +350%	4−5 −350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	7 +75%	4−5 −75%
Far Cry 5	18 +800%	2−3 −800%
Far Cry New Dawn	9 +200%	3−4 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	71 +2267%	3−4 −2267%
Hitman 3	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100 +567%	14−16 −567%
Metro Exodus	17 +325%	4−5 −325%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21 +163%	8−9 −163%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	52 +373%	10−12 −373%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +51.5%	30−35 −51.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Far Cry 5	12 +500%	2−3 −500%
Forza Horizon 4	14 +367%	3−4 −367%
Hitman 3	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16 +6.7%	14−16 −6.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16 +100%	8−9 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	11 +0%	10−12 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +51.5%	30−35 −51.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18
+700%

2−3

−700%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 +350%	2−3 −350%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +325%	4−5 −325%
Hitman 3	10−11 +42.9%	7−8 −42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +443%	7−8 −443%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11
+150%

4−5

−150%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Hitman 3	2−3	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	16 +300%	4−5 −300%
Metro Exodus	3−4	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	0−1	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+100%

3−4

−100%

This is how GeForce MX150 and HD Graphics 5000 compete in popular games:

GeForce MX150 is 160% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX150 is 329% faster in 1440p
GeForce MX150 is 300% faster in 4K

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX150 is 2567% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GeForce MX150 is ahead in 48 tests (98%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.88	1.52
Recency	17 May 2017	27 May 2013
Chip lithography	14 nm	22 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	30 Watt

GeForce MX150 has a 286.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 57.1% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX150 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 5000 in performance tests.

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