GeForce MX450 vs GTS 250

Place in the ranking	972	461
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.09	no data
Power efficiency	0.71	26.88
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	G92B	N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	4 March 2009 (15 years ago)	1 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores	128	896
Core clock speed	738 MHz	1395 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1575 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	25 Watt (12 - 29 Watt TGP)
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	44.93	100.8
Floating-point processing power	0.3871 TFLOPS	3.226 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	32
TMUs	64	64

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Length	229 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	None
SLI options	+	-

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 type	GDDR3	GDDR5, GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1100 MHz	10000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	70.4 GB/s	64.03 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 Connectors	Two Dual Link DVI	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	4.0	6.5
OpenGL	3.0	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
CUDA	+	7.5

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. 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.

GTS 250 1.54

GeForce MX450 9.74
+532%

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.

GTS 250 592

GeForce MX450 3746
+533%

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 HD	4−5 −625%	29 +625%
1440p	2−3 −750%	17 +750%
4K	4−5 −550%	26 +550%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	49.75	no data
1440p	99.50	no data
4K	49.75	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	32 +0%	32 +0%
Elden Ring	29 +0%	29 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18 +0%	18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	50 +0%	50 +0%
Metro Exodus	34 +0%	34 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45 +0%	45 +0%
Valorant	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	8 +0%	8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +0%	11 +0%
Dota 2	54 +0%	54 +0%
Elden Ring	28 +0%	28 +0%
Far Cry 5	58 +0%	58 +0%
Fortnite	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	40 +0%	40 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	38 +0%	38 +0%
Metro Exodus	16 +0%	16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5 +0%	5 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Valorant	22 +0%	22 +0%
World of Tanks	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6 +0%	6 +0%
Dota 2	81 +0%	81 +0%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30 +0%	30 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Valorant	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	11 +0%	11 +0%
Elden Ring	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	11 +0%	11 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
World of Tanks	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18 +0%	18 +0%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Valorant	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Dota 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Elden Ring	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	32 +0%	32 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Fortnite	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Valorant	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

This is how GTS 250 and GeForce MX450 compete in popular games:

GeForce MX450 is 625% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX450 is 750% faster in 1440p
GeForce MX450 is 550% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.54	9.74
Recency	4 March 2009	1 August 2020
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	25 Watt

GeForce MX450 has a 532.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 358.3% more advanced lithography process, and 500% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX450 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 250 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTS 250 is a desktop card while GeForce MX450 is a notebook one.

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