GeForce GTS 150M vs Radeon R6 (Mullins)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Radeon R6 (Carrizo) Radeon R6 (Kaveri) Radeon R6 (Mullins) Radeon R6 M255DX Radeon R6 M335DX Radeon R6 M340DX Radeon R6 M435DX Radeon R6 Mobile Graphics
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
9700M GTS 9800M GS 9800M GTS 9800S GTS 150M GTS 160M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R6 (Mullins) and GeForce GTS 150M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R6 (Mullins)
2014
0.62

GTS 150M outperforms R6 (Mullins) by a whopping 106% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

R6 (Mullins) R6 (Mullins)
GTS 150M GTS 150M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12031040
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data2.00
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 (2014)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameMullinsG94
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date29 April 2014 (10 years ago)3 March 2009 (15 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 cores12864
Core clock speed500 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistorsno data505 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data45 Watt
Texture fill rateno data12.80
Floating-point processing powerno data0.128 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data192
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32

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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
SLI options-2-way
MXM Typeno dataMXM 3.0 Type-B

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 typeno dataGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedno dataUp to 800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data51 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 dataDisplayPortHDMIDual Link DVILVDSSingle Link DVIVGA
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

Supported technologies

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

Power managementno data8.0

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data2.1
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-+

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Valorant 27−30
−13.8%
30−35
+13.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
−55.6%
27−30
+55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Dota 2 12−14
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Metro Exodus 0−1 2−3
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Valorant 27−30
−13.8%
30−35
+13.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Dota 2 12−14
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Valorant 27−30
−13.8%
30−35
+13.8%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 1−2
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 1−2
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Valorant 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

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

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GTS 150M is 250% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTS 150M is ahead in 32 tests (70%)
  • there's a draw in 14 tests (30%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.62 1.28
Recency 29 April 2014 3 March 2009
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm

R6 (Mullins) has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

GTS 150M, on the other hand, has a 106.5% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GTS 150M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R6 (Mullins) in performance tests.

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.

AMD Radeon R6 (Mullins)
Radeon R6 (Mullins)
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 150M
GeForce GTS 150M
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

R6 (Mullins) Radeon R6 (Mullins)
vs
HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)
GTS 150M GeForce GTS 150M
vs
R7 M260 Radeon R7 M260
R6 (Mullins) Radeon R6 (Mullins)
vs
R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L)
GT 525M NVIDIA GT 525M
vs
R6 (Mullins) (Mullins)
GTX 260M NVIDIA GTX 260M
vs
R6 (Mullins) (Mullins)
9800M GTX GeForce 9800M GTX
vs
R6 (Mullins) (Mullins)
8800M GTX GeForce 8800M GTX
vs
R6 (Mullins) (Mullins)
9800M GTS GeForce 9800M GTS
vs
R6 (Mullins) (Mullins)
8800M GTS GeForce 8800M GTS
vs
R6 (Mullins) (Mullins)
GT 435M NVIDIA GT 435M
vs
R6 (Mullins) (Mullins)
GTS 250M NVIDIA GTS 250M
vs
R6 (Mullins) (Mullins)
9700M GTS GeForce 9700M GTS
vs
R6 (Mullins) (Mullins)
GT 335M NVIDIA GT 335M
vs
R6 (Mullins) (Mullins)

Community ratings

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

No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon R6 (Mullins) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 2 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 150M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R6 (Mullins) or GeForce GTS 150M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.