United Kingdom
India
Deutschland
France
Canada
España
Belgium
Netherlands
Poland
Sweden
България
Australia
Singapore
Italia
中国
日本AMD Radeon RX Vega 10 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX150 – benchmarks and performance comparison
Ever since AMD released their mobile Ryzen CPUs and started pairing it with the Radeon RX Vega graphics they overtook Intel in the game of the integrated GPUs. However, is it good enough to battle one of the most popular laptop GPUs? The wide popularity of the GeForce MX150 is not a coincidence by any means – it offers great performance at a low cost and moreover – very low TDP.
You can check out our Top Laptop Graphics Ranking to see these two graphics cards and many more.
Specs overview
First of all, both of the GPUs are built on a 14nm architecture. Given the fact that the Radeon RX Vega 10 is an integrated solution, it uses just 10W of power, whereas the GeForce MX150 is rated at 25W. Additionally, the AMD GPU has 640 shading units compared to the 384 CUDA cores of the NVIDIA graphics chip. However, in the frequency department is where we see a huge difference – RX Vega 10 has a Base frequency of 300 MHz and reaches 1100 MHz in Boost, while the Base clock speed of the MX150 is 1469 MHz and goes up to 1532 MHz in Boost.
Another battle is won for the GeForce MX150 in the memory department, where it has its own dedicated memory. There are two options – 2 GB or 4 GB of GDDR5 with a bandwidth of 48.1 GB/s. On the other side, the Radeon RX Vega 10 shares the memory with the system, hence its bandwidth is widely system dependent.
Benchmarks
While the results of the synthetic benchmarks were various, all of them were stating the same thing – superiority for the GeForce MX150.
Results are from the 3DMark: Time Spy (Graphics) benchmark (higher the score, the better)
Results are from the 3DMark: Fire Strike (Graphics) benchmark (higher the score, the better)
Results are from the Unigine Superposition benchmark (higher the score, the better)
Gaming tests
However, the results from the benchmarks were confirmed in the real world gaming tests, where on some occasions, the frame rates shown by the MX150 are almost doubling the scores of its competitor.
| CS:GO | Full HD, Low (Check settings) | Full HD, Medium (Check settings) | Full HD, MAX (Check settings) |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMD Radeon RX Vega 10 | 71 fps | 52 fps | 40 fps |
| NVIDIA GeForce MX150 | 117 fps | 96 fps | 74 fps |
| Grand Theft Auto V (GTA 5) | Full HD, Low (Check settings) | Full HD, Medium (Check settings) | Full HD, Very High (Check settings) |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMD Radeon RX Vega 10 | 43 fps | – fps | – fps |
| NVIDIA GeForce MX150 | 82 fps | 33 fps | – fps |
Conclusion
Expected or not, the winner in this showdown is the NVIDIA GeForce MX150. It provides almost double performance, compared to the Radeon RX Vega 10. On the other side, this comes at the expense of higher power consumption and heat output.
All laptops equipped with the AMD Radeon RX Vega 10
All laptops equipped with the NVIDIA GeForce MX150
2288 in firestrike? I’ve seen 2800ish scores. Btw you’re testing it with a Ryzen 7 2700U??? What about the Ryzen 7 3750H or the 3700U? I’m sorry but this will make me believe that either you’re dumb, biased, or just too lazy. Please put more effort and care into your reviews and articles.
Hey, Kian Moeini, Thank you for your comment. First I’d like to say that 2800 in 3DMark Fire Strike looks very unrealistic for this GPU. Additionally, yes we are testing it with the Ryzen 7 2700U, since the graphics cores, hence the shading units, are absolutely the same on both occasions. Actually, the only difference between the Radeon RX Vega 10 on the Ryzen 7 2700U and the Ryzen 7 3750H and 3700U is a mere 100 MHz in favor of the newer CPUs which is either way not going to be utilized because of power limitations. I hope that… Read more »
I have a problem with this. Firstly, you tested a gimped 2700u as the laptop it was in has soldered one single stick of ram, everyone knows that the AMD APUs shine using double data rate vs single data rate. It is a rather biased. You are also comparing a $300-$400 laptop to laptops that are in the $500+ range. Put double data rate on and those APUs are actually nice and use a lot less power. This article is not really being intellectually honest in my opinion.