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. Show
Pipelines / CUDA cores384384Core clock speed1468 MHz1122 MHzBoost clock speed1532 MHz1242 MHzNumber of transistors1,800 million1,870 millionManufacturing process technology14 nm28 nmPower consumption (TDP)25 Watt (10 - 25 Watt TGP)23 WattTexture fill rate24.9123.83Floating-point performance1,127 gflops762.6 gflops Size and compatibilityInformation on GeForce MX150 and GeForce 940MX 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 sizelargemedium sizedBus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone MemoryParameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated VRAM and use a shared part of system RAM. Memory typeGDDR5DDR3, GDDR5Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GBMemory bus width64 Bit64 BitMemory clock speed6008 MHz4000 MHzMemory bandwidth40.1 GB/s40.1 GB/sShared memory-- Video outputs and portsTypes 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 outputsNo outputs TechnologiesSupported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes. GPU Boostno data2.0Optimusno data+GameWorksno data+ API supportList of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions. DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)Shader Model6.45.1OpenGL4.64.5OpenCL1.21.2Vulkan1.2.1311.1CUDA6.1+ Synthetic benchmark performanceNon-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale. Combined synthetic benchmark scoreThis 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 5.85 +50.8% MX150 outperforms 940MX by 51% in our combined benchmark results. PassmarkThis is probably the most ubiquitous benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various 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 2277 +50.9% MX150 outperforms 940MX by 51% in Passmark. 3DMark Vantage Performance3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead. Benchmark coverage: 17% GeForce MX150 10992 +28.6% MX150 outperforms 940MX by 29% in 3DMark Vantage Performance. 3DMark 11 Performance GPU3DMark 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. Benchmark coverage: 16% GeForce MX150 4494 +75.8% MX150 outperforms 940MX by 76% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU. 3DMark Fire Strike ScoreBenchmark coverage: 14% GeForce MX150 3104 +69.2% MX150 outperforms 940MX by 69% in 3DMark Fire Strike Score. 3DMark Fire Strike GraphicsFire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature seemingly made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware. Benchmark coverage: 14% GeForce MX150 3488 +74.7% MX150 outperforms 940MX by 75% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics. 3DMark Cloud Gate GPUCloud 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. Benchmark coverage: 14% GeForce MX150 19132 +66.2% MX150 outperforms 940MX by 66% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU. GeekBench 5 OpenCLGeekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group. Benchmark coverage: 9% GeForce MX150 9313 +52.5% MX150 outperforms 940MX by 53% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL. 3DMark Ice Storm GPUIce Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid. Benchmark coverage: 8% GeForce MX150 223740 +51.5% MX150 outperforms 940MX by 51% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU. GeekBench 5 VulkanGeekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group. Benchmark coverage: 5% GeForce MX150 8309 +55.4% MX150 outperforms 940MX by 55% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan. GeekBench 5 CUDAGeekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA. Benchmark coverage: 4% GeForce MX150 9799 +55.8% MX150 outperforms 940MX by 56% in GeekBench 5 CUDA. Unigine Heaven 3.0This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine. Benchmark coverage: 4% MX150 outperforms 940MX by 66% in Unigine Heaven 3.0. Mining hashratesCryptocurrency mining performance of GeForce MX150 and GeForce 940MX. Usually measured in megahashes per second. Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) no data 102 Mh/s Gaming performanceLet's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS. Average FPS across all PC gamesHere are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions: Full HD27 18 1440p24 14−16 4K19 10 Performance in popular gamesFull HD Low Preset Cyberpunk 207710−11 7−8 Full HD Medium Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey19 +72.7% 11 −72.7% Assassin's Creed Valhalla5−6 0−1 Battlefield 539 +144% 16 −144% Call of Duty: Modern Warfare22 +57.1% 14−16 −57.1% Cyberpunk 207711 +57.1% 7−8 −57.1% Far Cry 517 +41.7% 12 −41.7% Far Cry New Dawn18 +63.6% 11 −63.6% Forza Horizon 425 +38.9% 18 −38.9% Hitman 312−14 +62.5% 8−9 −62.5% Horizon Zero Dawn12 +71.4% 7−8 −71.4% Red Dead Redemption 214 +75% 8−9 −75% Shadow of the Tomb Raider17 +70% 10 −70% Watch Dogs: Legion14 +250% 4−5 −250% Full HD High Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey13 +62.5% 8 −62.5% Assassin's Creed Valhalla5−6 0−1 Battlefield 532 +146% 13 −146% Call of Duty: Modern Warfare7 −100% 14−16 +100% Cyberpunk 20777 +0% 7−8 +0% Far Cry 516 +33.3% 12 −33.3% Far Cry New Dawn17 +143% 7−8 −143% Forza Horizon 421 +50% 14 −50% Hitman 312−14 +62.5% 8−9 −62.5% Horizon Zero Dawn10−12 +57.1% 7−8 −57.1% Metro Exodus6 +0% 6−7 +0% Red Dead Redemption 210−12 +37.5% 8−9 −37.5% Shadow of the Tomb Raider11 +57.1% 7 −57.1% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt19 +58.3% 12 −58.3% Watch Dogs: Legion11 +175% 4−5 −175% Full HD Ultra Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey7 +40% 5 −40% Assassin's Creed Valhalla5−6 0−1 Battlefield 526 +136% 11 −136% Cyberpunk 207710−11 +42.9% 7−8 −42.9% Far Cry 514 +27.3% 11 −27.3% Far Cry New Dawn15 +114% 7−8 −114% Forza Horizon 414 +16.7% 12 −16.7% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt11 +57.1% 7 −57.1% Watch Dogs: Legion8−9 +100% 4−5 −100% 1440p High Preset Call of Duty: Modern Warfare9−10 +28.6% 7−8 −28.6% Hitman 310 +42.9% 7−8 −42.9% Horizon Zero Dawn10−12 +22.2% 9−10 −22.2% Metro Exodus6−7 +50% 4−5 −50% Red Dead Redemption 24−5 +100% 2−3 −100% Shadow of the Tomb Raider9−10 +28.6% 7−8 −28.6% 1440p Ultra Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey3−4 0−1 Battlefield 54−5 +100% 2−3 −100% Cyberpunk 20773−4 +50% 2−3 −50% Far Cry 510−11 +42.9% 7−8 −42.9% Far Cry New Dawn8−9 +167% 3−4 −167% Forza Horizon 49−10 +50% 6−7 −50% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt6−7 +50% 4−5 −50% Watch Dogs: Legion2−3 +100% 1−2 −100% 4K High Preset Call of Duty: Modern Warfare4−5 +33.3% 3−4 −33.3% Hitman 36−7 +50% 4−5 −50% Horizon Zero Dawn7−8 +0% 7−8 +0% Metro Exodus1−2 0−1 Red Dead Redemption 23−4 +50% 2−3 −50% Shadow of the Tomb Raider2−3 +100% 1−2 −100% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt3−4 0−1 4K Ultra Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey2−3 +100% 1−2 −100% Assassin's Creed Valhalla1−2 0−1 Battlefield 51−2 0−1 Cyberpunk 20771−2 0−1 Far Cry 56−7 +20% 5−6 −20% Far Cry New Dawn8−9 +14.3% 7−8 −14.3% Forza Horizon 47−8 +40% 5−6 −40% Watch Dogs: Legion1−2 0−1 This is how GeForce MX150 and GeForce 940MX compete in popular games: 1080p resolution:
1440p resolution:
4K resolution:
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
All in all, in popular games:
Advantages and disadvantagesPerformance score 5.85 3.88 Recency 16 May 2017 10 March 2016 Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 23 Watt The GeForce MX150 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 940MX in performance tests. Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer. Cast your own voteDo you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card. GeForce MX150 GeForce 940MX Similar GPU comparisonsWe selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider. User ratings: view and submitHere you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself. Rate NVIDIA GeForce MX150 on a scale of 1 to 5:  Rate NVIDIA GeForce 940MX on a scale of 1 to 5: Questions and commentsHere you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch. |
