FireStream 9250 vs GeForce GT 520MX

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 520MX with FireStream 9250, including specs and performance data.

GT 520MX
2011
1 GB DDR3, 20 Watt
0.69

FireStream 9250 outperforms 520MX by a whopping 303% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1234847
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.661.43
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGF119RV770
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date30 May 2011 (14 years ago)16 June 2008 (17 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 cores48800
Core clock speed900 MHz625 MHz
Number of transistors292 million956 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate7.20025.00
Floating-point processing power0.1728 TFLOPS1 TFLOPS
ROPs416
TMUs840
L1 Cache64 KB160 KB
L2 Cache128 KB256 KB

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin

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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz993 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s63.55 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 API10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

GT 520MX 0.69
FireStream 9250 2.78
+303%

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.

GT 520MX 288
Samples: 516
FireStream 9250 1164
+304%
Samples: 2

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−260%
18−20
+260%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
Valorant 27−30
−279%
110−120
+279%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 20−22
−300%
80−85
+300%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Dota 2 12−14
−275%
45−50
+275%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−260%
18−20
+260%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
Valorant 27−30
−279%
110−120
+279%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Dota 2 12−14
−275%
45−50
+275%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−260%
18−20
+260%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
Valorant 27−30
−279%
110−120
+279%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 4−5
−300%
16−18
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−286%
27−30
+286%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−293%
55−60
+293%
Valorant 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.69 2.78
Recency 30 May 2011 16 June 2008
Chip lithography 40 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 150 Watt

GT 520MX has an age advantage of 2 years, a 38% more advanced lithography process, and 650% lower power consumption.

FireStream 9250, on the other hand, has a 303% higher aggregate performance score.

The FireStream 9250 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 520MX in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 520MX is a notebook graphics card while FireStream 9250 is a workstation one.

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.


3.4 271 votes

Rate GeForce GT 520MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 6 votes

Rate FireStream 9250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 520MX or FireStream 9250, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.