Quadro NVS 150M vs GeForce MX450

Place in the ranking	466	1410
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	26.90	1.29
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1	G98
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	1 August 2020 (4 years ago)	15 August 2008 (16 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	896	8
Core clock speed	1395 MHz	530 MHz
Boost clock speed	1575 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	4,700 million	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt (12 - 29 Watt TGP)	10 Watt
Texture fill rate	100.8	2.120
Floating-point processing power	3.226 TFLOPS	0.0208 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	4
TMUs	64	4

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).

Interface	PCIe 4.0 x4	MXM-I
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, GDDR6	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	256 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	10000 MHz	700 MHz
Memory bandwidth	64.03 GB/s	11.2 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

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.5	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2	N/A
CUDA	7.5	1.1

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 MX450 9.41
+5128%

NVS 150M 0.18

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 MX450 3745
+5250%

NVS 150M 70

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	29	0−1
1440p	17	-0−1
4K	26	-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +72.7%	10−12 −72.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	32 +1500%	2−3 −1500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +72.7%	10−12 −72.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	18 +800%	2−3 −800%
Forza Horizon 4	50 +900%	5−6 −900%
Forza Horizon 5	34	0−1
Metro Exodus	34	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	45 +1025%	4−5 −1025%
Valorant	35−40	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	8 −37.5%	10−12 +37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +450%	2−3 −450%
Dota 2	54 +5300%	1−2 −5300%
Far Cry 5	58 +729%	7−8 −729%
Fortnite	55−60 +5600%	1−2 −5600%
Forza Horizon 4	40 +700%	5−6 −700%
Forza Horizon 5	24−27	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	38	0−1
Metro Exodus	16	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 +1400%	5−6 −1400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5 +25%	4−5 −25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +625%	4−5 −625%
Valorant	22	0−1
World of Tanks	140−150 +1182%	10−12 −1182%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +72.7%	10−12 −72.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	6 +200%	2−3 −200%
Dota 2	81 +8000%	1−2 −8000%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +471%	7−8 −471%
Forza Horizon 4	30 +500%	5−6 −500%
Forza Horizon 5	22	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 +1400%	5−6 −1400%
Valorant	35−40	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	11	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	11	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +4400%	1−2 −4400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9	0−1
World of Tanks	70−75 +6900%	1−2 −6900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +425%	4−5 −425%
Forza Horizon 4	18	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	14−16	0−1
Metro Exodus	18−20	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
Valorant	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4	0−1
Dota 2	20−22 +33.3%	14−16 −33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 +33.3%	14−16 −33.3%
Metro Exodus	5−6	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 +33.3%	14−16 −33.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Dota 2	32 +113%	14−16 −113%
Far Cry 5	12−14	0−1
Fortnite	10−11	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	12−14	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	7−8	0−1
Valorant	10−11	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2

3−4

+0%

3−4

+0%

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

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce MX450 is 4400% faster.
in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the NVS 150M is 38% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GeForce MX450 is ahead in 28 tests (93%)
NVS 150M is ahead in 1 test (3%)
there's a draw in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.41	0.18
Recency	1 August 2020	15 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	256 MB
Chip lithography	12 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt	10 Watt

GeForce MX450 has a 5127.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 441.7% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 150M, on the other hand, has 150% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX450 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 150M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX450 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro NVS 150M is a mobile workstation one.

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