GeForce GT 520M vs Radeon Pro WX 4150

Place in the ranking	559	1160
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.01
Power efficiency	9.36	4.25
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	Baffin	GF108
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	1 March 2017 (7 years ago)	5 January 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$59.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	48
Core clock speed	1002 MHz	600 MHz
Boost clock speed	1053 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	3,000 million	585 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	12 Watt
Texture fill rate	58.97	4.800
Floating-point processing power	1.887 TFLOPS	0.1152 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	4
TMUs	56	8

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	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 2.0 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	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	96 GB/s	12.8 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

Portable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync	+	-
Optimus	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 API
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	2.0	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	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. 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.

Pro WX 4150 6.78
+816%

GT 520M 0.74

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.

Pro WX 4150 2615
+818%

GT 520M 285

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	70−75 +775%	8 −775%
Full HD	100−110 +733%	12 −733%
1200p	60−65 +757%	7 −757%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

5.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−12
+267%

3−4

−267%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10	0−1
Battlefield 5	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +367%	3−4 −367%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +1800%	1−2 −1800%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +1025%	4−5 −1025%
Hitman 3	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +264%	10−12 −264%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +283%	6−7 −283%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +71%	30−35 −71%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10	0−1
Battlefield 5	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +367%	3−4 −367%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +1800%	1−2 −1800%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +1025%	4−5 −1025%
Hitman 3	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +264%	10−12 −264%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +283%	6−7 −283%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +110%	10−11 −110%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +71%	30−35 −71%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +367%	3−4 −367%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +1025%	4−5 −1025%
Hitman 3	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +264%	10−12 −264%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +283%	6−7 −283%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +110%	10−11 −110%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +71%	30−35 −71%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +1050%	2−3 −1050%
Hitman 3	10−11 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +400%	3−4 −400%
Metro Exodus	7−8	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +2050%	2−3 −2050%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14
+300%

3−4

−300%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6	0−1
Hitman 3	3−4	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +900%	2−3 −900%
Metro Exodus	4−5	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	7−8	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+250%

2−3

−250%

This is how Pro WX 4150 and GT 520M compete in popular games:

Pro WX 4150 is 775% faster in 900p
Pro WX 4150 is 733% faster in 1080p
Pro WX 4150 is 757% faster in 1200p

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro WX 4150 is 2050% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, Pro WX 4150 surpassed GT 520M in all 35 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.78	0.74
Recency	1 March 2017	5 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	12 Watt

Pro WX 4150 has a 816.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

GT 520M, on the other hand, has 316.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro WX 4150 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 520M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 4150 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GT 520M 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.