GeForce GT 625M vs GTS 250M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTS 250M and GeForce GT 625M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTS 250M
2009
1 GB DDR3, GDDR3, GDDR5, 28 Watt
1.43
+15.3%

GTS 250M outperforms GT 625M by a moderate 15% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking10011043
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGT2xx (2009−2012)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameN10E-GEN13M-GS
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 June 2009 (15 years ago)1 October 2012 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

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 cores9696
CUDA cores9696
Core clock speed500 MHzUp to 625 MHz
Number of transistors727 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate16.0010.00
Floating-point performance0.24 gflops0.24 gflops
Gigaflops360no data

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0PCI Express 2.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
SLI options+-
MXM TypeMXM 3.0 Type-Bno data

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 typeDDR3, GDDR3, GDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 2000 MHz1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/sUp to 14.4 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 ConnectorsHDMIVGALVDSSingle Link DVIDisplayPortDual Link DVINo outputs
HDMI++
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536Up to 2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray-+
Optimus-+
Power management8.0no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 API
Shader Model4.15.1
OpenGL2.14.5
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA++

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.

GTS 250M 1.43
+15.3%
GT 625M 1.24

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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 250M 553
+15.7%
GT 625M 478

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 HD28
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how GTS 250M and GT 625M compete in popular games:

  • GTS 250M is 17% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTS 250M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTS 250M is ahead in 17 tests (36%)
  • there's a draw in 30 tests (64%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.43 1.24
Recency 15 June 2009 1 October 2012
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 15 Watt

GTS 250M has a 15.3% higher aggregate performance score.

GT 625M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 86.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTS 250M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 625M in performance tests.


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 GTS 250M
GeForce GTS 250M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M
GeForce GT 625M

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.


3.7 7 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 250M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 31 vote

Rate GeForce GT 625M 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.