NVIDIA GeForce MX250 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX110
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce MX250 and NVIDIA GeForce MX110 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 1 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- Around 5% higher boost clock speed: 1038 MHz vs 993 MHz
- Around 50% higher pipelines: 384 vs 256
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 3x lower typical power consumption: 10 Watt vs 30 Watt
- Around 20% higher memory clock speed: 6008 MHz vs 5012 MHz
- Around 69% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2392 vs 1417
- Around 27% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 240 vs 189
- 2.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9329 vs 4256
- Around 83% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4027 vs 2197
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3710 vs 3502
- Around 83% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4027 vs 2197
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3710 vs 3502
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 21 February 2019 vs 17 November 2017 |
| Boost clock speed | 1038 MHz vs 993 MHz |
| Pipelines | 384 vs 256 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt vs 30 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 6008 MHz vs 5012 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2392 vs 1417 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 240 vs 189 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9329 vs 4256 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4027 vs 2197 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3710 vs 3502 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 vs 3352 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4027 vs 2197 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3710 vs 3502 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 vs 3352 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce MX110
- Around 3% higher core clock speed: 965 MHz vs 937 MHz
| Core clock speed | 965 MHz vs 937 MHz |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce MX250
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce MX110
| 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 MX250 | NVIDIA GeForce MX110 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2392 | 1417 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 240 | 189 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9329 | 4256 |
| 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 | 2197 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3710 | 3502 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3352 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4027 | 2197 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3710 | 3502 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3352 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 888 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce MX250 | NVIDIA GeForce MX110 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell |
| Code name | GP108B | GM108 |
| Launch date | 21 February 2019 | 17 November 2017 |
| Place in performance rating | 861 | 891 |
| Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1038 MHz | 993 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 937 MHz | 965 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 256 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt | 30 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,800 million | |
| Floating-point performance | 762.6 gflops | |
| Texture fill rate | 23.83 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 6008 MHz | 5012 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 / DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 40.1 GB / s | |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| 3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
| CUDA | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| Optimus | ||
| Verde Drivers | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce MX250 with others
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
ATIRadeon X1600 XT
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
AMDRadeon R9 M295X Mac Edition
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
AMDRadeon R9 M380
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
IntelIris Plus Graphics 650
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
AMDRadeon 540
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
IntelUHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU)
