NVIDIA GeForce 920MX vs AMD Radeon R7 250
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 920MX and AMD Radeon R7 250 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 920MX
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- Around 26% higher texture fill rate: 28.22 GTexel / s vs 22.4 GTexel / s
- 4.7x lower typical power consumption: 16 Watt vs 75 Watt
- Around 57% higher memory clock speed: 1800 MHz vs 1150 MHz
- Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3691 vs 3170
- Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3691 vs 3170
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 25 March 2016 vs 8 October 2013 |
Texture fill rate | 28.22 GTexel / s vs 22.4 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 16 Watt vs 75 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz vs 1150 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1080 vs 1076 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3691 vs 3170 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3356 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3691 vs 3170 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3356 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 250
- Around 6% higher boost clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 993 MHz
- Around 50% higher pipelines: 384 vs 256
- Around 19% better floating-point performance: 716.8 gflops vs 602.1 gflops
- Around 91% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 289 vs 151
- 2.3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 8916 vs 3930
- Around 24% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2179 vs 1764
- Around 24% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2179 vs 1764
Specifications (specs) | |
Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz vs 993 MHz |
Pipelines | 384 vs 256 |
Floating-point performance | 716.8 gflops vs 602.1 gflops |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 289 vs 151 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8916 vs 3930 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2179 vs 1764 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2179 vs 1764 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 920MX
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 250
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce 920MX | AMD Radeon R7 250 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1080 | 1076 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 151 | 289 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3930 | 8916 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1764 | 2179 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3691 | 3170 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3356 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1764 | 2179 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3691 | 3170 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3356 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 385 | 0 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 20.161 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 304.279 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.655 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.046 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 96.934 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce 920MX | AMD Radeon R7 250 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | GM108 | Oland |
Launch date | 25 March 2016 | 8 October 2013 |
Place in performance rating | 1033 | 1087 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Design | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
Launch price (MSRP) | $89 | |
Price now | $78.34 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 27.62 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 993 MHz | 1050 MHz |
Core clock speed | 965 MHz | |
Floating-point performance | 602.1 gflops | 716.8 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 256 | 384 |
Texture fill rate | 28.22 GTexel / s | 22.4 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 16 Watt | 75 Watt |
Stream Processors | 384 | |
Transistor count | 1,040 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | N / A |
Length | 168 mm | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | 72 GB/s |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1150 MHz |
Memory type | DDR3, GDDR5 | DDR3 / GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
CUDA | ||
GameWorks | ||
GPU Boost | ||
Optimus | ||
Verde Drivers | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync |