Quadro4 900 XGL vs GeForce MX150

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX150 with Quadro4 900 XGL, including specs and performance data.

GeForce MX150
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 10 Watt
5.88
+58700%

MX150 outperforms Quadro4 900 XGL by a whopping 58700% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5881506
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency41.00no data
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Kelvin (2001−2003)
GPU code nameGP108NV25 A2
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date17 May 2017 (7 years ago)19 February 2002 (22 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 cores384no data
Core clock speed937 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1038 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,800 million63 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Wattno data
Texture fill rate24.912.400
Floating-point processing power0.7972 TFLOPSno data
ROPs168
TMUs248

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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16AGP 4x
Widthno data1-slot
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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount4 GB128 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz325 MHz
Memory bandwidth40.1 GB/s10.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)8.1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.61.3
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA6.1-

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 5.88
+58700%
Quadro4 900 XGL 0.01

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
+56650%
Quadro4 900 XGL 4

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 HD26-0−1
1440p26-0−1
4K18-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 19 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8 0−1
Battlefield 5 26 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 11 0−1
Far Cry 5 20 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 24 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 80 0−1
Hitman 3 12−14 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 100 0−1
Metro Exodus 23 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 27 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 36 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8 0−1
Battlefield 5 18 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 7 0−1
Far Cry 5 18 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 9 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 71 0−1
Hitman 3 12−14 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 100 0−1
Metro Exodus 17 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 52 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11 0−1
Far Cry 5 12 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 14 0−1
Hitman 3 12−14 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 16 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 16−18 0−1
Hitman 3 10−11 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14 0−1
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5 0−1
Hitman 3 2−3 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 16 0−1
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.88 0.01
Recency 17 May 2017 19 February 2002
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 150 nm

GeForce MX150 has a 58700% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 971.4% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce MX150 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro4 900 XGL in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX150 is a notebook card while Quadro4 900 XGL is a 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 Quadro4 900 XGL
Quadro4 900 XGL

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.


3.6 1617 votes

Rate GeForce MX150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Quadro4 900 XGL 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.