AMD
Radeon 760M 8600G vs GeForce MX150
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GeForce MX150
Aggregate performance score
We've compared 760M 8600G and GeForce MX150 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗760M 8600G outperforms GeForce MX150 by ~55% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+55%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: Radeon 760M 8600G (~26%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider 760M 8600G
- Higher catalog performance index
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0 · FSR
Reasons to consider GeForce MX150
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
AMD
NVIDIAPerformance
Price / performance
4831
10054
Graphics card ranking
Positions 14–19of 411
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce MX150
105 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
48Better
31
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
41Better
29
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
39Better
26
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
47
100Better
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
54Better
43
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Device class
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
HDMI
DisplayPort
Power consumption—
TFLOPSBetter
Clock speedBetter
VRAM
Upscaling
Compute API
Memory type
Memory frequency—
Memory bandwidth—
Interface
Power consumption—
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
Process nodeBetter
Release date
Launch price——
Max monitors
Max resolution
Recommended PSU
Length
Thickness
Architecture
Transistor count
Die size
Shader units / cores
USB Type-C
Memory cache
Memory bus
Power connector
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares 760M 8600G and GeForce MX150 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
760M 8600GGeForce MX150
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
197 FPS
157 FPS
1080p Ultra
139 FPS
110 FPS
1440p Ultra
108 FPS
59 FPS
4K Ultra
54 FPS
21 FPS
Counter-Strike 2760M 8600G197 FPSGeForce MX150157 FPS760M 8600G139 FPSGeForce MX150110 FPS760M 8600G108 FPSGeForce MX15059 FPS760M 8600G54 FPSGeForce MX15021 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077760M 8600G127 FPSGeForce MX150101 FPS760M 8600G110 FPSGeForce MX15087 FPS760M 8600G78 FPSGeForce MX15043 FPS760M 8600G36 FPSGeForce MX15014 FPS
Forza Horizon 5760M 8600G160 FPSGeForce MX150128 FPS760M 8600G104 FPSGeForce MX15083 FPS760M 8600G97 FPSGeForce MX15053 FPS760M 8600G79 FPSGeForce MX15031 FPS
Hogwarts Legacy760M 8600G104 FPSGeForce MX15083 FPS760M 8600G87 FPSGeForce MX15069 FPS760M 8600G70 FPSGeForce MX15038 FPS760M 8600G37 FPSGeForce MX15015 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100483143%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100563838%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100483823%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100056200%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1000100200%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100484213%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100484116%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100483823%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10048456%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100483823%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX12.212.1
Vulkan1.31.4
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingFSRNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureNot publicly specifiedPascal
Process node4 nmBetter14 nm
Release date20232017
Device classMobileMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor countNot publicly specified1800 million
Die sizeNot publicly specified74 mm²
Shader units / coresNot publicly specified384
Base clock800 MHz1469 MHzBetter
Boost clock2800 MHzBetter1532 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfaceIGPPCIe 3.0 x4
LengthOEM dependentOEM dependent
ThicknessOEM dependentIGP
Recommended PSUOEM dependentOEM dependent
Power connectorIntegrated laptop powerNone
Display outputs and limits
HDMIOEM dependentOEM dependent
DisplayPortOEM dependentOEM dependent
USB Type-COEM dependentOEM dependent
Max monitorsOEM dependentOEM dependent
Max resolutionOEM dependentDepends on host system
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM- SMA2 GB GDDR5
Memory typeSMAGDDR5 / GDDR5X
Memory busSystem memory interface64 bit
TFLOPS5.32Better1.177
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 64
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (3)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (2)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: 760M 8600G or GeForce MX150?+
760M 8600G has the higher overall gaming score, while 760M 8600G offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GeForce MX150 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GeForce MX150 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
760M 8600G offers more overall performance, while 760M 8600G offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GeForce MX150 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
760M 8600G is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
760M 8600G leads in combined 1440p performance. 760M 8600G can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
760M 8600G is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GeForce MX150 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GeForce MX150 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to 760M 8600G if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.