Quadro P4200 vs GeForce MX150

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX150 with Quadro P4200, including specs and performance data.

GeForce MX150
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 10 Watt
5.89

P4200 outperforms MX150 by a whopping 327% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking592213
Place by popularity99not in top-100
Power efficiency40.3617.25
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGP108GP104
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date17 May 2017 (7 years ago)21 February 2018 (6 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 cores3842304
Core clock speed937 MHz1227 MHz
Boost clock speed1038 MHz1647 MHz
Number of transistors1,800 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate24.91237.2
Floating-point processing power0.7972 TFLOPS7.589 TFLOPS
ROPs1664
TMUs24144

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 sizelargelarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth40.1 GB/s192.3 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 outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA6.16.1

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 MX150 5.89
Quadro P4200 25.17
+327%

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 MX150 2269
Quadro P4200 10491
+362%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 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.

GeForce MX150 9614
Quadro P4200 38375
+299%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 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.

GeForce MX150 9799
Quadro P4200 37676
+284%

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 HD26
−323%
110−120
+323%
1440p30
−300%
120−130
+300%
4K20
−325%
85−90
+325%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−310%
40−45
+310%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 19
−189%
55−60
+189%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−514%
40−45
+514%
Battlefield 5 26
−215%
80−85
+215%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21
−143%
50−55
+143%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
−273%
40−45
+273%
Far Cry 5 20
−190%
55−60
+190%
Far Cry New Dawn 24
−175%
65−70
+175%
Forza Horizon 4 80
−82.5%
140−150
+82.5%
Hitman 3 12−14
−325%
50−55
+325%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100
−16%
110−120
+16%
Metro Exodus 23
−274%
85−90
+274%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27
−141%
65−70
+141%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 36
−136%
85−90
+136%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
−106%
100−110
+106%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21
−162%
55−60
+162%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−514%
40−45
+514%
Battlefield 5 18
−356%
80−85
+356%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−325%
50−55
+325%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
−486%
40−45
+486%
Far Cry 5 18
−222%
55−60
+222%
Far Cry New Dawn 9
−633%
65−70
+633%
Forza Horizon 4 71
−106%
140−150
+106%
Hitman 3 12−14
−325%
50−55
+325%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100
−16%
110−120
+16%
Metro Exodus 17
−406%
85−90
+406%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−306%
65−70
+306%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21
−305%
85−90
+305%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 52
−3.8%
50−55
+3.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
−106%
100−110
+106%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7
−686%
55−60
+686%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−514%
40−45
+514%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−325%
50−55
+325%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−310%
40−45
+310%
Far Cry 5 12
−383%
55−60
+383%
Forza Horizon 4 14
−943%
140−150
+943%
Hitman 3 12−14
−325%
50−55
+325%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16
−625%
110−120
+625%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16
−431%
85−90
+431%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
−391%
50−55
+391%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
−106%
100−110
+106%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−306%
65−70
+306%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
−336%
45−50
+336%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−322%
35−40
+322%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−333%
24−27
+333%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−2400%
24−27
+2400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−480%
27−30
+480%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−433%
16−18
+433%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−314%
27−30
+314%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−747%
140−150
+747%
Hitman 3 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−300%
50−55
+300%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−860%
45−50
+860%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
−5400%
55−60
+5400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−520%
30−35
+520%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−274%
140−150
+274%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
−320%
40−45
+320%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
−400%
24−27
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−400%
20−22
+400%
Hitman 3 2−3
−900%
20−22
+900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16
−706%
120−130
+706%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−867%
27−30
+867%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−1250%
27−30
+1250%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−275%
14−16
+275%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 6−7
Far Cry 5 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−467%
30−35
+467%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 30−35
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−267%
21−24
+267%

This is how GeForce MX150 and Quadro P4200 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P4200 is 323% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P4200 is 300% faster in 1440p
  • Quadro P4200 is 325% faster in 4K

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

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P4200 is 5400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Quadro P4200 surpassed GeForce MX150 in all 70 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.89 25.17
Recency 17 May 2017 21 February 2018
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 16 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 100 Watt

GeForce MX150 has a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 900% lower power consumption.

Quadro P4200, on the other hand, has a 327.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 months, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Quadro P4200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX150 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX150 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro P4200 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.

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.


NVIDIA GeForce MX150
GeForce MX150
NVIDIA Quadro P4200
Quadro P4200

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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

Community ratings

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


3.5 1636 votes

Rate GeForce MX150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 57 votes

Rate Quadro P4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.