MX250 vs GT 750M SLI

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

GT 750M SLI
6.88
+9.7%

GT 750M SLI outperforms MX250 by 10% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking521541
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money1.252.40
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameN14P-GTN17S-G2
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 April 2013 (10 years old)20 February 2019 (5 years old)
Current price$545 $1165
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GeForce MX250 has 92% better value for money than GT 750M SLI.

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores768384
Core clock speed967 MHz1518 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1582 MHz
Number of transistors1300 Million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data10/25 Watt
Texture fill rateno data24.91

Size and compatibility

Information on GeForce GT 750M SLI and GeForce MX250 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizelargelarge
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x4
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

Memory

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 typeDDR3, GDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2x 2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width2x 128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 - 5000 MHz7000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data48.06 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 dataNo outputs

API support

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

DirectX1112 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkanno data1.2
CUDA+6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GT 750M SLI 6.88
+9.7%
GeForce MX250 6.27

GT 750M SLI outperforms MX250 by 10% in our combined benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GT 750M SLI 16142
GeForce MX250 16488
+2.1%

MX250 outperforms GT 750M SLI by 2% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GT 750M SLI 4634
+0%
GeForce MX250 4633

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GT 750M SLI 3703
+1.2%
GeForce MX250 3660

GT 750M SLI outperforms MX250 by 1% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GT 750M SLI 23491
+9%
GeForce MX250 21545

GT 750M SLI outperforms MX250 by 9% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GT 750M SLI 44
+1.6%
GeForce MX250 44

GT 750M SLI outperforms MX250 by 2% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.

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 HD57
+148%
23
−148%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
−27.3%
14
+27.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−35.7%
19
+35.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
−44.4%
13
+44.4%
Battlefield 5 21−24
−9.1%
24
+9.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
−15%
23
+15%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−18.8%
19
+18.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
−23.5%
21
+23.5%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−29.2%
31
+29.2%
Hitman 3 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+7.7%
13
−7.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−16.7%
14
+16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−12.5%
18
+12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+7.7%
13
−7.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+15.8%
19
−15.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+25%
16
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−6.3%
17
+6.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
−5.9%
18
+5.9%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+129%
7
−129%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+133%
6
−133%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+42.9%
7
−42.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+50%
8
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+45.5%
11
−45.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−50%
21
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+100%
7
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+57.1%
14
−57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+0%
17
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+50%
16
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+16.7%
12
−16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Hitman 3 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Battlefield 5 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Battlefield 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how GT 750M SLI and GeForce MX250 compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • GT 750M SLI is 148% faster than GeForce MX250

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 750M SLI is 133% faster than the GeForce MX250.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce MX250 is 50% faster than the GT 750M SLI.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 750M SLI is ahead in 39 tests (58%)
  • GeForce MX250 is ahead in 13 tests (19%)
  • there's a draw in 15 tests (22%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 6.88 6.27
Recency 1 April 2013 20 February 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 750M SLI and GeForce MX250. The differences in performance seem too small.


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

User ratings

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


NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M SLI
GeForce GT 750M SLI
NVIDIA GeForce MX250
GeForce MX250

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User ratings: view and submit

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


4.4 14 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 1433 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce MX250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

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