NVIDIA GeForce MX250 vs AMD Radeon R7 350X OEM
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce MX250 and AMD Radeon R7 350X OEM videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 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), 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.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce MX250
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 6.5x lower typical power consumption: 10 Watt vs 65 Watt
- 3x more memory clock speed: 6008 MHz vs 2000 MHz
- Around 15% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9088 vs 7888
- Around 92% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4027 vs 2097
- Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3710 vs 3127
- Around 92% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4027 vs 2097
- Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3710 vs 3127
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 21 February 2019 vs 5 May 2015 |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt vs 65 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 6008 MHz vs 2000 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9088 vs 7888 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4027 vs 2097 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3710 vs 3127 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4027 vs 2097 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3710 vs 3127 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 350X OEM
- Around 7% higher core clock speed: 1000 MHz vs 937 MHz
- Around 1% higher boost clock speed: 1050 MHz vs 1038 MHz
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 6862 vs 3357
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 6862 vs 3357
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1000 MHz vs 937 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz vs 1038 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 6862 vs 3357 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 6862 vs 3357 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce MX250
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 350X OEM
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 MX250 | AMD Radeon R7 350X OEM |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2423 | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 242 | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9088 | 7888 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 46.992 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 535.24 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.64 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 44.7 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 141.816 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4027 | 2097 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3710 | 3127 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 6862 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4027 | 2097 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3710 | 3127 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 6862 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 888 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce MX250 | AMD Radeon R7 350X OEM | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Pascal | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | GP108B | Oland |
Launch date | 21 February 2019 | 5 May 2015 |
Place in performance rating | 885 | 832 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1038 MHz | 1050 MHz |
Core clock speed | 937 MHz | 1000 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 384 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt | 65 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,800 million | 1,040 million |
Floating-point performance | 806.4 gflops | |
Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (11_1) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 6008 MHz | 2000 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 32 GB / s |