OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

NVIDIA GeForce MX450 Laptop review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£990VRAM:2 GBMemory bus width:64 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):25 W

NVIDIA GeForce MX450 Laptop Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 3 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

5.1/10

Overall score

Score
5.1/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components

40%

3.7

Technical score

25%

3.7

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.8, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–¼Worse than 96% of graphics cards
5.1

Value for money

Value for money
5.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components

70%

5.1

Overall score

30%

5.3

Price

â–¼Worse than 99%
3.7

Technical score

Technical score
3.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components

44%

2.0

Performance

24%

1.5

Memory

12%

8.8

Power

11%

7.3

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

5.5

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 96%
3.7

Reviews score

Reviews score
3.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 97% of models

3.7

Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.8

Average grade

20%

7.4

Popularity

Grades by review (3)
1 review, with a printed score. 2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 97%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £990
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA GeForce MX450 Laptop

Technical score
Technical score
3.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components:

44%

2.0

Performance

24%

1.5

Memory

12%

8.8

Power

11%

7.3

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

5.5

Connectivity

3.7
Reviews score
3.7
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
5.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components:

70%

5.1

Overall score

30%

5.3

Price

5.1
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
2088 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 2088 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 95.4% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
3,722 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 3,722 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 95.4% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
1,870 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 1,870 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 95.2% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
1.67 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 1.67 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 95.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
2 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 2 GB of VRAM, which is less than 94.3% of graphics cards and equal to 3.9% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
64 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 64 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 96.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 3.3% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
80 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 80 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 96.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
10,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 10,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 83.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.5% of graphics cards and equal to 50.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x4
This graphics card uses x4 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 98.8% of graphics cards and equal to 1.2% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 17% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
3
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 3 displays, which is fewer than 91% of graphics cards and equal to 6.6% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
0
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 0 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 96.9% of graphics cards and equal to 3.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.4
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4, which is older than on 80.8% of graphics cards and equal to 13.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
8.1 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 8.1 Gbps, which is slower than on 65.3% of graphics cards and equal to 22.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
25 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 25 W, which is lower than that of 98.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
29 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 29 W under peak load, which is lower than 99.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
?
Board power limit
31 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 31 W, which is lower than that of 98.7% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
?
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

NVIDIA GeForce MX450 Laptop vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 88.4% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (25 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    25 W vs 215 W
  • 85.9% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (31 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    31 W vs 220 W
  • 75% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (3 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    3 W vs 12 W
  • 86.8% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (29 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    29 W vs 220 W
  • 88.4% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (25 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    25 W vs 215 W
  • 85.9% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (31 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    31 W vs 220 W
  • 75% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (3 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    3 W vs 12 W
  • 86.8% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (29 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    29 W vs 220 W
  • 62.9% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (930 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    930 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 48.6% lower review score
    Reviews score
    3.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 97% of models

    3.7

    Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.8

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    1 review, with a printed score. 2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    3.7 vs 7.2
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 26 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (14 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    14 vs 40
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 128 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (56 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    56 vs 184
  • 76.7% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (88.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    88.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 48.6% lower review score
    Reviews score
    3.7/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 97% of models

    3.7

    Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.8

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    1 review, with a printed score. 2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    3.7 vs 7.2
  • 44.7% worse value for money
    NVIDIA GeForce MX450 Laptop has worse value for money than the average graphics card (5.12 vs 7.4).
    5.12 vs 7.41
  • 90.4% more expensive
    NVIDIA GeForce MX450 Laptop is more expensive than the average graphics card (£990 vs £520).
    £990 vs £520
  • 62.9% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (930 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    930 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 26 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (14 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    14 vs 40
  • 128 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (56 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    56 vs 184
  • 76.7% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (88.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    88.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 48 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (16 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    16 vs 64
  • 27.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,395 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,395 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 68.8% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (50.4 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    50.4 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 92.6% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (1.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    1.67 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 83.6% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (3,722 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    3,722 points vs 22,638 points
  • 85.9% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (2088 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    2,088 points vs 14,779 points
  • 3 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2020 vs 2023).
    August 2020
    2020 vs 2023
  • 84.5% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (1,870 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    1,870 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 89.6% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.05 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 88.7% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (3.3 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    3.33 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 3,456 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (896 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    896 vs 4,352
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 82.1% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (80 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    80 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 128 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (64 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    64 bit vs 192 bit
  • 47.4% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (10,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    10,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 28.6% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 50% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (64 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    64 KB vs 128 KB
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 2.4x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (12 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    12 nm vs 5 nm
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x4 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x4 vs x16
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Lower VRS tier
    This graphics card supports a lower VRS tier than the average graphics card (Tier 1 vs Tier 2).
    Tier 1 vs Tier 2
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 3).
    1.2 vs 3
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 79.5% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (4,700 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    4,700 million vs 22,900 million
  • 3 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (0 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    0 vs 3
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 1 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (3 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    3 vs 4
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1a).
    2.0b vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No VRR support
    This graphics card does not support VRR, the average graphics card does.
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 1.4a).
    1.4 vs 1.4a
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (3 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    3 vs 6
  • 62.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 28 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (28 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    28 dB vs 0 dB
  • 8 °C higher idle temperature
    This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (45 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    45 °C vs 37 °C
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

4.0
TechnoFanPTY
≈ estimated
03/07/2021
Hands-on review · performance, battery and drive tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce MX450 Laptop is not recommended, since its performance is disappointing for the price and better laptops exist.
9.0
Varun Nahar
≈ estimated
14/03/2021
Hands-on review · battery, display and performance tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce MX450 Laptop is a well-built Windows machine worth buying if your budget allows.
9.5
Varun Nahar
≈ estimated
04/11/2020
Hands-on review · performance, gaming and battery tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce MX450 Laptop is excellent value and a top pick for work, study and light gaming.
Not graded
Overview video
Hands-on video, no verdict
Overview video
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.6
notebookcheck.nl
✓ explicit
16/02/2021
Benchmark test · Business laptop GPU
Verdict
The Nvidia GeForce MX450 in the Lenovo ThinkPad E15 Gen 2 runs moderately demanding games smoothly, though The Witcher 3 manages only about 34 fps on Medium.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA GeForce MX450 Laptop

  • Significant performance boost over integrated graphics (Intel Iris Xe/AMD Radeon)
  • Efficient power consumption (25W-30W TDP) allows for better battery life in ultrabooks
  • Capable of handling 'casual' gaming for titles like Valorant, CS:GO, and League of Legends
  • Solid value for budget-conscious students and office workers needing light creative work
  • Noticeable acceleration in photo/video editing apps (e.g., Adobe Lightroom and Premiere Pro)
  • Supports modern features like PCIe Gen 4 x4 and GDDR6 memory

What customers don't like about NVIDIA GeForce MX450 Laptop

  • Limited 2GB VRAM is a major bottleneck for modern AAA games and complex 3D projects
  • Heats up significantly during sustained gaming sessions, especially in thin ultrabooks
  • Restricted 64-bit memory bus leads to a performance penalty compared to the GTX 1650
  • Often requires lowering settings to 720p or 'Low' for demanding AAA titles
  • Lacks advanced NVIDIA features like DLSS, Ray Tracing, and ShadowPlay
  • GPU performance drops noticeably when the laptop is running on battery power

Verdict

The Nvidia GeForce MX450 is an entry-level dedicated laptop graphics card based on the Turing TU117 architecture, typically featuring 896 CUDA cores and 2GB of GDDR6 (or GDDR5) VRAM on a 64-bit memory bus. It offers versatile performance profiles with TGP variants ranging from 12W to 28.5W and was notable for being the first mobile GPU to support PCIe Gen 4 x4. Main pros include a significant performance boost over integrated graphics for light photo/video editing and casual 1080p gaming, as well as high energy efficiency that suits slim ultrabooks. However, its primary cons are the limited 2GB memory buffer, which restricts performance in modern AAA titles or high-resolution creative projects, and performance that still falls significantly below gaming-tier GPUs like the GTX 1650.

Compare NVIDIA GeForce MX450 Laptop with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA GeForce MX450 Laptop and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found