GeForce MX250 vs G102M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce G102M and GeForce MX250, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce G102M
2009
Up to 512 MB GDDR2, 14 Watt
0.37

MX250 outperforms G102M by a whopping 1346% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1270598
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.1042.46
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameC79GP108B
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date8 January 2009 (16 years ago)20 February 2019 (6 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 cores16384
Core clock speed450 MHz937 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1038 MHz
Number of transistors314 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate3.60024.91
Floating-point processing power0.0352 TFLOPS0.7972 TFLOPS
Gigaflops48no data
ROPs416
TMUs824

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
Bus supportPCI-E 1.0no data
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 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 typeGDDR2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amountUp to 512 MB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed400 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth6.4 GB/s48.06 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 ConnectorsVGAHDMIDisplayPortSingle Link DVILVDSPortable Device Dependent
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power management8.0no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.7 (6.4)
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GeForce G102M 0.37
GeForce MX250 5.35
+1346%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GeForce G102M 167
GeForce MX250 2392
+1332%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD1−2
−2200%
23
+2200%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 27
+0%
27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 75
+0%
75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+0%
14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 20
+0%
20
+0%
Battlefield 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 41
+0%
41
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry 5 19
+0%
19
+0%
Fortnite 55
+0%
55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 31
+0%
31
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 17
+0%
17
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 28
+0%
28
+0%
Valorant 118
+0%
118
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7
+0%
7
+0%
Battlefield 5 19
+0%
19
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21
+0%
21
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 64
+0%
64
+0%
Far Cry 5 17
+0%
17
+0%
Fortnite 25
+0%
25
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24
+0%
24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 13
+0%
13
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 28
+0%
28
+0%
Metro Exodus 7
+0%
7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 23
+0%
23
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21
+0%
21
+0%
Valorant 115
+0%
115
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14
+0%
14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 57
+0%
57
+0%
Far Cry 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+0%
16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 19
+0%
19
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+0%
12
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 22
+0%
22
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how GeForce G102M and GeForce MX250 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce MX250 is 2200% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.37 5.35
Recency 8 January 2009 20 February 2019
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 10 Watt

GeForce MX250 has a 1345.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 40% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX250 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce G102M in performance tests.

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 G102M
GeForce G102M
NVIDIA GeForce MX250
GeForce MX250

Other comparisons

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.


3.6 43 votes

Rate GeForce G102M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 1593 votes

Rate GeForce MX250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce G102M or GeForce MX250, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.