GeForce MX250 vs 9400M GeForceBoost

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot rated573
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data43.40
Architectureno dataPascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameno dataGP108B
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date3 June 2008 (16 years ago)20 February 2019 (5 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores24384
Core clock speedno data937 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1038 MHz
Number of transistorsno data1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data10 Watt
Texture fill rateno data24.91
Floating-point processing powerno data0.7972 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data24

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x4
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1502 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data48.06 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectorsno dataPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX1012 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.7 (6.4)
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

9400M GeForceBoost 125
GeForce MX250 16488
+13090%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 June 2008 20 February 2019
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm

GeForce MX250 has an age advantage of 10 years, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 9400M GeForceBoost and GeForce MX250. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 9400M GeForceBoost
GeForce 9400M GeForceBoost
NVIDIA GeForce MX250
GeForce MX250

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.4 14 votes

Rate GeForce 9400M GeForceBoost on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 1537 votes

Rate GeForce MX250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.