NVIDIA GeForce MX250 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce MX250 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280 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, 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 10 year(s) 8 month(s) later
- Around 60% higher pipelines: 384 vs 240
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 65 nm
- 23.6x lower typical power consumption: 10 Watt vs 236 Watt
- 5.4x more memory clock speed: 6008 MHz vs 1107 MHz
- Around 87% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2423 vs 1299
- 3.9x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 242 vs 62
- Around 38% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3710 vs 2697
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 vs 3325
- Around 38% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3710 vs 2697
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 vs 3325
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 21 February 2019 vs 16 June 2008 |
| Pipelines | 384 vs 240 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 65 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt vs 236 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 6008 MHz vs 1107 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2423 vs 1299 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 242 vs 62 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3710 vs 2697 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 vs 3325 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3710 vs 2697 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 vs 3325 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280
- Around 38% higher core clock speed: 1296 MHz vs 937 MHz
- 2.4x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 21396 vs 9071
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1296 MHz vs 937 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 21396 vs 9071 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce MX250
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce MX250 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2423 | 1299 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 242 | 62 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9071 | 21396 |
| 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 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3710 | 2697 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3325 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4027 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3710 | 2697 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3325 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 888 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce MX250 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | GP108B | GT200 |
| Launch date | 21 February 2019 | 16 June 2008 |
| Place in performance rating | 885 | 1051 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $649 | |
| Price now | $522.78 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 2.98 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1038 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 937 MHz | 1296 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 240 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt | 236 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,800 million | 1,400 million |
| CUDA cores | 240 | |
| Floating-point performance | 622.1 gflops | |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | |
| Texture fill rate | 48.2 billion / sec | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video, HDTVDual Link DVI |
| Audio input for HDMI | S / PDIF | |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 6-pin & 8-pin |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
| Length | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) | |
| SLI options | 2-way3-way | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
Memory |
||
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 512 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 6008 MHz | 1107 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 141.7 GB / s | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce MX250 with others
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 256 DDR
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
ATIMobility Radeon X700
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8310E
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
NVIDIAP106-090
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
IntelUHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU)
