
GRID M60-1Q vs GeForce MX450

GRID M60-1Q
Popular choices:

GeForce MX450
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GRID M60-1Q is positioned at rank 322 and the GeForce MX450 is on rank 307, so the GeForce MX450 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID M60-1Q
Performance Per Dollar GeForce MX450
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce MX450 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce MX450 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GRID M60-1Q lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce MX450 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.7% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GRID M60-1Q.
| Insight | GRID M60-1Q | GeForce MX450 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GRID M60-1Q offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $50 versus $200 for the GeForce MX450, it costs 75% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 297.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID M60-1Q | GeForce MX450 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+297.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($50) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GRID M60-1Q and GeForce MX450

GRID M60-1Q
The GRID M60-1Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 557 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,695 points.

GeForce MX450
The GeForce MX450 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 1 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1395 MHz to 1575 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 25W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,720 points.
Graphics Performance
The GRID M60-1Q scores 3,695 and the GeForce MX450 reaches 3,720 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID M60-1Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GeForce MX450 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID M60-1Q) vs 896 (GeForce MX450). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID M60-1Q) vs 3.226 TFLOPS (GeForce MX450). Boost clocks: 1178 MHz vs 1575 MHz.
| Feature | GRID M60-1Q | GeForce MX450 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,695 | 3,720 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+129% | 896 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.825 TFLOPS+50% | 3.226 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz | 1575 MHz+34% |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 128+100% | 64 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID M60-1Q | GeForce MX450 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of video memory. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GRID M60-1Q | GeForce MX450 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID M60-1Q draws 225W versus the GeForce MX450's 25W — a 160% difference. The GeForce MX450 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID M60-1Q) vs 350W (GeForce MX450). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Mobile.
| Feature | GRID M60-1Q | GeForce MX450 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 25W-89% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Mobile |
| Perf/Watt | 16.4 | 148.8+807% |
Value Analysis
The GRID M60-1Q launched at $2500 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the GeForce MX450 launched at $250 and now averages $200. The GRID M60-1Q costs 75% less ($150 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 73.9 (GRID M60-1Q) vs 18.6 (GeForce MX450) — the GRID M60-1Q offers 297.3% better value. The GeForce MX450 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2015).
| Feature | GRID M60-1Q | GeForce MX450 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2500 | $250-90% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50-75% | $200 |
| Performance per Dollar | 73.9+297% | 18.6 |
| Codename | GM204 | N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1 |
| Release | August 30 2015 | August 1 2020 |
| Ranking | #525 | #523 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.











