Quadro NVS 140M vs GeForce MX150

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX150 with Quadro NVS 140M, including specs and performance data.

GeForce MX150
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 10 Watt
5.86
+2830%

MX150 outperforms NVS 140M by a whopping 2830% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking6001400
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency40.431.38
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGP108G86
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date17 May 2017 (7 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 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 cores38416
Core clock speed937 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1038 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,800 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate24.913.200
Floating-point processing power0.7972 TFLOPS0.0256 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs248

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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB512 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz600 MHz
Memory bandwidth40.1 GB/s9.6 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA6.11.1

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.

GeForce MX150 5.86
+2830%
NVS 140M 0.20

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 2265
+2804%
NVS 140M 78

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 HD28
+367%
6
−367%
1440p30
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
4K190−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Battlefield 5 39
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Far Cry 5 17 0−1
Fortnite 59
+2850%
2−3
−2850%
Forza Horizon 4 25
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 26
+271%
7−8
−271%
Valorant 100
+300%
24−27
−300%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Battlefield 5 32
+3100%
1−2
−3100%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 87
+691%
10−12
−691%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
+600%
1−2
−600%
Dota 2 68
+656%
9−10
−656%
Far Cry 5 16 0−1
Fortnite 34
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
Forza Horizon 4 21
+950%
2−3
−950%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 26 0−1
Metro Exodus 6 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 22
+214%
7−8
−214%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+375%
4−5
−375%
Valorant 100
+300%
24−27
−300%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 26 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Dota 2 62
+589%
9−10
−589%
Far Cry 5 14 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 14
+600%
2−3
−600%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 15
+114%
7−8
−114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+175%
4−5
−175%
Valorant 65−70
+160%
24−27
−160%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 55
+5400%
1−2
−5400%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7 0−1
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 43
+4200%
1−2
−4200%
Valorant 66
+3200%
2−3
−3200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 7−8 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−12 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 12−14 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 9−10 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+13.3%
14−16
−13.3%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Valorant 33
+1550%
2−3
−1550%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 24 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

This is how GeForce MX150 and NVS 140M compete in popular games:

  • GeForce MX150 is 367% faster in 1080p
  • GeForce MX150 is 2900% faster in 1440p

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce MX150 is 4200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GeForce MX150 surpassed NVS 140M in all 32 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.86 0.20
Recency 17 May 2017 9 May 2007
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 80 nm

GeForce MX150 has a 2830% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce MX150 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 140M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX150 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro NVS 140M is a mobile workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce MX150
GeForce MX150
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 140M
Quadro NVS 140M

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 1666 votes

Rate GeForce MX150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 10 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 140M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce MX150 or Quadro NVS 140M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.