GeForce GTS 150M vs Radeon R5 (Carrizo)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R5 (Carrizo) and GeForce GTS 150M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R5 (Carrizo)
2015
12 Watt
1.84
+40.5%

R5 (Carrizo) outperforms GTS 150M by a considerable 40% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9111023
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.762.08
ArchitectureGCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameCarrizoG94
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date4 June 2015 (9 years ago)3 March 2009 (15 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 cores25664
Core clock speedno data400 MHz
Boost clock speed800 MHzno data
Number of transistors2410 Million505 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12-35 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rateno data12.80
Floating-point processing powerno data0.128 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data192
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
SLI options-2-way
MXM Typeno dataMXM 3.0 Type-B

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 typeno dataGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data1 GB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedno dataUp to 800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data51 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 dataDisplayPortHDMIDual Link DVILVDSSingle Link DVIVGA
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

Supported technologies

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

Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data2.1
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-+

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+6.1%
30−35
−6.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+6.1%
30−35
−6.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+6.1%
30−35
−6.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R5 (Carrizo) is 250% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R5 (Carrizo) is ahead in 34 tests (71%)
  • there's a draw in 14 tests (29%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.84 1.31
Recency 4 June 2015 3 March 2009
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 45 Watt

R5 (Carrizo) has a 40.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 275% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R5 (Carrizo) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 150M in performance tests.


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.


AMD Radeon R5 (Carrizo)
Radeon R5 (Carrizo)
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 150M
GeForce GTS 150M

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.


4 6 votes

Rate Radeon R5 (Carrizo) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 2 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 150M 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.