GeForce MX450 vs Quadro FX 1800M

Place in the ranking	1054	462
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.85	26.82
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GT215	N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	15 June 2009 (15 years ago)	1 August 2020 (4 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 cores	72	896
Core clock speed	561 MHz	1395 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1575 MHz
Number of transistors	727 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	25 Watt (12 - 29 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate	13.46	100.8
Floating-point processing power	0.162 TFLOPS	3.226 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	32
TMUs	24	64

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 size	medium sized	no data
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x4
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5, GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	550 MHz	10000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	35.2 GB/s	64.03 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 Connectors

No 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.

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	4.1	6.5
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
CUDA	+	7.5

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.

FX 1800M 1.21

GeForce MX450 9.74
+705%

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.

FX 1800M 466

GeForce MX450 3744
+703%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark 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.

FX 1800M 3452

GeForce MX450 22831
+561%

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 HD	3−4 −867%	29 +867%
1440p	2−3 −750%	17 +750%
4K	3−4 −767%	26 +767%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −100%	18−20 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −967%	32 +967%
Elden Ring	0−1	29

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −3100%	30−35 +3100%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −100%	18−20 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −500%	18 +500%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −525%	50 +525%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −650%	45 +650%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −3100%	30−35 +3100%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +12.5%	8 −12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −267%	11 +267%
Dota 2	1−2 −5300%	54 +5300%
Elden Ring	0−1	28
Far Cry 5	10−11 −480%	58 +480%
Fortnite	5−6 −1040%	55−60 +1040%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −400%	40 +400%
Grand Theft Auto V	1−2 −3700%	38 +3700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 −436%	75−80 +436%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +20%	5 −20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −314%	27−30 +314%
World of Tanks	27−30 −422%	140−150 +422%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −3100%	30−35 +3100%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −100%	18−20 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −100%	6 +100%
Dota 2	1−2 −8000%	81 +8000%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −300%	40−45 +300%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −275%	30 +275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 −436%	75−80 +436%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 −571%	45−50 +571%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	8−9
World of Tanks	6−7 −1067%	70−75 +1067%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −250%	7−8 +250%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −320%	21−24 +320%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
Valorant	6−7 −300%	24−27 +300%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 −33.3%	20−22 +33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −33.3%	20−22 +33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	3−4 −833%	27−30 +833%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	6−7
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −33.3%	20−22 +33.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Dota 2	14−16 −113%	32 +113%
Far Cry 5	0−1	12−14
Valorant	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Metro Exodus	34 +0%	34 +0%
Valorant	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Metro Exodus	16 +0%	16 +0%
Valorant	22 +0%	22 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Valorant

35−40

+0%

35−40

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	11 +0%	11 +0%
Elden Ring	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	11 +0%	11 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18 +0%	18 +0%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Elden Ring	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Fortnite	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

This is how FX 1800M and GeForce MX450 compete in popular games:

GeForce MX450 is 867% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX450 is 750% faster in 1440p
GeForce MX450 is 767% faster in 4K

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

in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the FX 1800M is 20% faster.
in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GeForce MX450 is 8000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

FX 1800M is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
GeForce MX450 is ahead in 39 tests (67%)
there's a draw in 17 tests (29%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.21	9.74
Recency	15 June 2009	1 August 2020
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	25 Watt

GeForce MX450 has a 705% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 80% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX450 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 1800M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 1800M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce MX450 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.