Quadro T2000 Mobile vs GeForce MX150

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX150 with Quadro T2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GeForce MX150
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 10 Watt
5.90

T2000 Mobile outperforms MX150 by a whopping 252% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking592269
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency40.6123.83
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGP108TU117
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date17 May 2017 (7 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 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 cores3841024
Core clock speed937 MHz1575 MHz
Boost clock speed1038 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors1,800 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate24.91114.2
Floating-point processing power0.7972 TFLOPS3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs2464

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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth40.1 GB/s128.0 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA6.17.5

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 5.90
T2000 Mobile 20.77
+252%

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 2270
T2000 Mobile 7985
+252%

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.

GeForce MX150 4494
T2000 Mobile 13524
+201%

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
−246%
90−95
+246%
1440p28
−239%
95−100
+239%
4K20
−250%
70−75
+250%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−185%
35−40
+185%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−242%
40−45
+242%
Elden Ring 14−16
−340%
65−70
+340%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 15
−340%
65−70
+340%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−185%
35−40
+185%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
−356%
40−45
+356%
Forza Horizon 4 27
−226%
85−90
+226%
Metro Exodus 18
−211%
55−60
+211%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27
−74.1%
45−50
+74.1%
Valorant 24
−250%
80−85
+250%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21
−214%
65−70
+214%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−185%
35−40
+185%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
−1267%
40−45
+1267%
Dota 2 40
−82.5%
70−75
+82.5%
Elden Ring 13
−408%
65−70
+408%
Far Cry 5 42
−61.9%
65−70
+61.9%
Fortnite 29
−276%
100−110
+276%
Forza Horizon 4 21
−319%
85−90
+319%
Grand Theft Auto V 26
−181%
70−75
+181%
Metro Exodus 11
−409%
55−60
+409%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 56
−146%
130−140
+146%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−176%
45−50
+176%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
−200%
65−70
+200%
Valorant 17
−394%
80−85
+394%
World of Tanks 87
−171%
230−240
+171%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14
−371%
65−70
+371%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−185%
35−40
+185%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−242%
40−45
+242%
Dota 2 62
−17.7%
70−75
+17.7%
Far Cry 5 26
−162%
65−70
+162%
Forza Horizon 4 16
−450%
85−90
+450%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 19
−626%
130−140
+626%
Valorant 16−18
−394%
80−85
+394%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 5−6
−560%
30−35
+560%
Elden Ring 5
−600%
35−40
+600%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
−467%
30−35
+467%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 43
−300%
170−180
+300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−280%
18−20
+280%
World of Tanks 55
−155%
140−150
+155%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
−320%
40−45
+320%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−88.9%
16−18
+88.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−240%
16−18
+240%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−375%
55−60
+375%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−440%
50−55
+440%
Metro Exodus 7−8
−571%
45−50
+571%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−314%
27−30
+314%
Valorant 16−18
−238%
50−55
+238%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
Elden Ring 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−1400%
14−16
+1400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21
−195%
60−65
+195%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−225%
12−14
+225%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
World of Tanks 30
−233%
100−105
+233%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Dota 2 24
−45.8%
35−40
+45.8%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−286%
27−30
+286%
Fortnite 5−6
−400%
24−27
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−520%
30−35
+520%
Valorant 5−6
−400%
24−27
+400%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how GeForce MX150 and T2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile is 246% faster in 1080p
  • T2000 Mobile is 239% faster in 1440p
  • T2000 Mobile is 250% faster in 4K

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 1400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile is ahead in 61 test (97%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.90 20.77
Recency 17 May 2017 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 60 Watt

GeForce MX150 has 500% lower power consumption.

T2000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 252% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro T2000 Mobile 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 T2000 Mobile 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 T2000 Mobile
Quadro T2000 Mobile

Other comparisons

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 1651 vote

Rate GeForce MX150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 398 votes

Rate Quadro T2000 Mobile 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.