Radeon Pro 5600M vs GeForce MX150

Place in performance ranking	556	213
Place by popularity	92	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.20	no data
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Navi / RDNA (2019−2020)
GPU code name	N17S-G1	Navi 10
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	16 May 2017 (6 years ago)	15 June 2020 (3 years ago)
Current price	$1049	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	2560
Core clock speed	1468 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1532 MHz	1265 MHz
Number of transistors	1,800 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt (10 - 25 Watt TGP)	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	24.91	164.8
Floating-point performance	1,127 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce MX150 and Radeon Pro 5600M 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	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	HBM2
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	2048 Bit
Memory clock speed	6008 MHz	1540 MBps
Memory bandwidth	40.1 GB/s	394.2 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 graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2
CUDA	6.1	no data

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 5.89

Pro 5600M 24.06
+308%

Radeon Pro 5600M outperforms GeForce MX150 by 308% based on our aggregated 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

Pro 5600M 9313
+309%

Radeon Pro 5600M outperforms GeForce MX150 by 309% in Passmark.

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	27 −307%	110−120 +307%
1440p	24 −296%	95−100 +296%
4K	19 −295%	75−80 +295%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−11

−290%

35−40
+290%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	19 −153%	45−50 +153%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 −600%	40−45 +600%
Battlefield 5	39 −100%	75−80 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	22 −186%	60−65 +186%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 −255%	35−40 +255%
Far Cry 5	17 −271%	60−65 +271%
Far Cry New Dawn	18 −256%	60−65 +256%
Forza Horizon 4	25 −224%	80−85 +224%
Hitman 3	14−16 −414%	70−75 +414%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12 −325%	50−55 +325%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14 −179%	35−40 +179%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	17 −212%	50−55 +212%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14 −229%	45−50 +229%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	13 −269%	45−50 +269%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 −600%	40−45 +600%
Battlefield 5	32 −144%	75−80 +144%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7 −800%	60−65 +800%
Cyberpunk 2077	7 −457%	35−40 +457%
Far Cry 5	16 −294%	60−65 +294%
Far Cry New Dawn	17 −276%	60−65 +276%
Forza Horizon 4	21 −286%	80−85 +286%
Hitman 3	14−16 −414%	70−75 +414%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −364%	50−55 +364%
Metro Exodus	6 −567%	40−45 +567%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −255%	35−40 +255%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	11 −382%	50−55 +382%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	19 −184%	50−55 +184%
Watch Dogs: Legion	11 −318%	45−50 +318%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7 −586%	45−50 +586%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 −600%	40−45 +600%
Battlefield 5	26 −200%	75−80 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −290%	35−40 +290%
Far Cry 5	14 −350%	60−65 +350%
Far Cry New Dawn	15 −327%	60−65 +327%
Forza Horizon 4	14 −479%	80−85 +479%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	11 −391%	50−55 +391%
Watch Dogs: Legion	8−9 −475%	45−50 +475%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −311%	35−40 +311%
Hitman 3	10 −300%	40−45 +300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −167%	30−35 +167%
Metro Exodus	4−5 −500%	24−27 +500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −350%	18−20 +350%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 −256%	30−35 +256%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −550%	24−27 +550%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	24−27
Battlefield 5	3−4 −1700%	50−55 +1700%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −400%	14−16 +400%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −356%	40−45 +356%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −667%	45−50 +667%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −513%	45−50 +513%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −460%	27−30 +460%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −1700%	18−20 +1700%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −375%	18−20 +375%
Hitman 3	5−6 −360%	21−24 +360%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −100%	16−18 +100%
Metro Exodus	0−1	14−16
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −333%	12−14 +333%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3 −750%	16−18 +750%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −1200%	24−27 +1200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −400%	14−16 +400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −550%	12−14 +550%
Battlefield 5	1−2 −2700%	27−30 +2700%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	6−7
Far Cry 5	5−6 −300%	20−22 +300%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 −188%	21−24 +188%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −580%	30−35 +580%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −1000%	10−12 +1000%

This is how GeForce MX150 and Pro 5600M compete in popular games:

Pro 5600M is 307% faster than GeForce MX150 in 1080p
Pro 5600M is 296% faster than GeForce MX150 in 1440p
Pro 5600M is 295% faster than GeForce MX150 in 4K

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

in Battlefield 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 5600M is 2700% faster than the GeForce MX150.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, Pro 5600M surpassed GeForce MX150 in all 65 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.89	24.06
Recency	16 May 2017	15 June 2020
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt	50 Watt