NVIDIA GeForce MX110 vs NVIDIA Quadro P600 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly between these two GPUs. The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 does not win a single recorded test in the head-to-head comparison. The NVIDIA Quadro P600 wins both available benchmarks. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P600 records a score of 11181 against the MX110's 4255, a lead of 61.9%. In Geekbench Vulkan, the P600 scores 9755 versus the MX110's 3413, a 65% advantage. The MX110's strongest recorded result is its OpenCL score, which places it at the 23rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The P600, despite winning decisively here, sits at the 19th percentile overall, which reflects how the database's full GPU population includes far more powerful workstation and gaming parts. The P600 also has broader benchmark coverage, with nine recorded tests spanning DirectX 9 through 12, compute, and 2D workloads, while the MX110 only has two recorded tests.

Architecture Differences

The MX110 uses the GM108S chip built on the Maxwell architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It contains 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The P600 uses the GP107 chip on the Pascal architecture, fabricated by Samsung on a 14 nm process. This chip packs 3,300 million transistors into a 132 mm² die, with a density of 25.0 million per square millimeter. The P600's newer process node allows more than three times the transistor count in less than twice the die area.

The memory subsystems differ substantially. Both cards carry 2 GB of GDDR5, but the MX110 uses a 64-bit bus with 40.10 GB/s of bandwidth, while the P600 uses a 128-bit bus with 64.13 GB/s. The P600's memory clock runs at 1002 MHz with 4 Gbps effective, while the MX110's memory runs at 1253 MHz with 5 Gbps effective. The P600 compensates for its lower clock with double the bus width.

The compute resources show a clear hierarchy. The MX110 has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The P600 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The P600 also clocks higher: 1329 MHz base and 1557 MHz boost versus 978 MHz base and 1006 MHz boost for the MX110. The P600's pixel rate is 24.91 GPixel/s versus 8.048 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 37.37 GTexel/s versus 16.10 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput stands at 1,195.8 GFLOPS for the P600 against 515.1 GFLOPS for the MX110.

The P600 also supports a higher DirectX feature level: DirectX 12 (12_1) versus DirectX 12 (11_0) for the MX110. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The P600 has a 16-lane PCIe 3.0 interface, while the MX110 uses a 4-lane interface. The MX110 is an integrated graphics package (IGP) with no slot width, while the P600 is a single-slot card measuring 150 mm in length and 69 mm in height, with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Power consumption is 30 W for the MX110 and 40 W for the P600, with neither requiring external power connectors.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded head-to-head tests both favor the Quadro P600 heavily. In Geekbench OpenCL, the P600 scores 11181, which is 61.9% higher than the MX110's 4255. This is not a marginal win but a dominant one, roughly 2.6 times the raw score. The MX110's OpenCL result is within 0.3% of the GeForce GTX 650's average score of 3823, and 1.1% above the Intel UHD Graphics 710's 3792, according to the nearest rivals data. The P600's OpenCL score is not directly compared to its nearest rivals in the head-to-head table, but its average benchmark score of 2923 sits within 0.3% of the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB's 2913, within 0.4% of the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF's 2910, and within 0.6% of the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB's 2907.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the P600 scores 9755 against the MX110's 3413, a 65% gap. The MX110's Vulkan score is lower than its OpenCL score, while the P600's Vulkan score is somewhat lower than its OpenCL score but still remains far above the MX110's best result. The MX110 finishes with 0 wins and 2 losses in the head-to-head set. The P600's additional benchmarks show its range: PassMark G3D score of 3317, G2D score of 529, GPU compute score of 1415, and DirectX-specific results of 56 in DirectX 9, 24 in DirectX 11, and 14 in both DirectX 10 and DirectX 12.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the NVIDIA Quadro P600 is the superior GPU in every measured dimension. It wins both head-to-head tests by margins exceeding 60%. Its architecture is newer, its process node is smaller, its transistor count is more than triple, its memory bandwidth is 60% higher, its shading unit count is 50% higher, and its clock speeds are roughly 35% higher at base and 55% higher at boost. The MX110 was released on 2017-11-16, while the P600 was released on 2017-02-06. The P600's predecessor is listed as Quadro Maxwell and its successor as Quadro Volta, while the MX110 has no listed predecessor or successor. Both are end-of-life products.

Users who need a discrete GPU for portable systems with minimal power draw, the MX110's 30 W TDP and IGP form factor might fit certain constrained designs. But the benchmark data does not support choosing it for performance. The P600's 40 W TDP is only 10 W higher, and it delivers roughly 2.6 times the OpenCL performance and 2.9 times the Vulkan performance. The P600 also offers four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, making it a practical workstation card for multi-monitor setups, whereas the MX110's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent. The P600's suggested PSU is 200 W, and it runs from slot power alone. For anyone comparing these two based on recorded measurements, the Quadro P600 is the clear pick.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The MX110 has an average benchmark score of 3834, which is higher than the P600's average of 2923. However, this average is based on only two tests for the MX110, while the P600 has nine recorded tests including several lower DirectX scores that pull its average down.

Q: How much faster is the Quadro P600 in OpenCL?

A: The P600 scores 11181 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 61.9% higher than the MX110's 4255. The P600's score is roughly 2.6 times that of the MX110.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The MX110 has 40.10 GB/s of bandwidth on a 64-bit bus, while the P600 has 64.13 GB/s on a 128-bit bus. The P600's bandwidth is about 60% higher.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The MX110 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the P600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The P600's feature level is higher.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Quadro P600 has 384 shading units, while the MX110 has 256. The P600 also has 24 TMUs and 16 ROPs, versus 16 TMUs and 8 ROPs for the MX110.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The MX110 has a 30 W TDP and is an integrated graphics package with no slot width. The P600 has a 40 W TDP, is a single-slot card, and has a suggested PSU of 200 W. Neither requires external power connectors.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce MX110 | NVIDIA Quadro P600 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | GM108S | GP107 |

| Architecture | Maxwell | Pascal |

| Process node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 1,020 million | 3,300 million |

| Die size | 77 mm² | 132 mm² |

| Transistor density | 13.2M / mm² | 25.0M / mm² |

| Base clock | 978 MHz | 1329 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1006 MHz | 1557 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1253 MHz, 5 Gbps effective | 1002 MHz, 4 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 2 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |

| Memory bus width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 40.10 GB/s | 64.13 GB/s |

| Shading units | 256 | 384 |

| TMUs | 16 | 24 |

| ROPs | 8 | 16 |

| Pixel rate | 8.048 GPixel/s | 24.91 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 16.10 GTexel/s | 37.37 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 515.1 GFLOPS | 1,195.8 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 30 W | 40 W |

| Slot width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Power connectors | None | None |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x4 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| Release date | 2017-11-16 | 2017-02-06 |

| Production status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 200 W |