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 68% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2412 vs 1435
- Around 27% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 240 vs 189
- 2.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9244 vs 4276
- 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 | 2412 vs 1435 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 240 vs 189 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9244 vs 4276 |
| 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 | 2412 | 1435 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 240 | 189 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9244 | 4276 |
| 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 | 902 | 911 |
| 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
NVIDIAGeForce PCX 5300
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 2600 XT
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 7150M + nForce 630M
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 860M
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
AMDRadeon Vega 11
NVIDIAGeForce MX250 vs
NVIDIAT400
