GeForce GTS 450 vs Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) with GeForce GTS 450, including specs and performance data.
Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) outperforms GTS 450 by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 747 | 760 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 91 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.63 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 2.18 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2017) | Fermi (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Surface Book | GF106 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 October 2015 (9 years ago) | 13 September 2010 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $129 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 954 MHz | 783 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 993 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,170 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 106 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 25.06 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.6013 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 16 |
| TMUs | no data | 32 |
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).
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 210 mm |
| Height | no data | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 6-pin |
| SLI options | - | + |
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 | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 1804 (3608 data rate) MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 57.7 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 data | Mini HDMITwo Dual Link DVI |
| HDMI | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | Internal |
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 | DirectX 12 (FL 11_0), Shader 5.0 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.2 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| CUDA | + | + |
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.
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.
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.
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.
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:
| 900p | 27−30
−3.7%
| 28
+3.7%
|
| Full HD | 28
−39.3%
| 39
+39.3%
|
| 1200p | 27−30
+0%
| 27
+0%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 3.31 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Fortnite | 18−20
+11.8%
|
16−18
−11.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 60−65
−36.5%
|
86
+36.5%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Fortnite | 18−20
+11.8%
|
16−18
−11.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 18−20
+11.8%
|
16−18
−11.8%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
+8.3%
|
24−27
−8.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Valorant | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
This is how Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) and GTS 450 compete in popular games:
- GTS 450 is 4% faster in 900p
- GTS 450 is 39% faster in 1080p
- A tie in 1200p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) is 25% faster.
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTS 450 is 37% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) is ahead in 24 tests (41%)
- GTS 450 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
- there's a draw in 33 tests (57%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.45 | 3.23 |
| Recency | 1 October 2015 | 13 September 2010 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) has a 6.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) and GeForce GTS 450.
Be aware that Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) is a notebook card while GeForce GTS 450 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
