GeForce MX250 vs GTX 285M SLI

Place in the ranking	685	576
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.92	43.56
Architecture	G9x (2007−2010)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	N10E-GTX	GP108B
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	2 March 2009 (15 years ago)	20 February 2019 (5 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 cores	256	384
Core clock speed	576 MHz	937 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1038 MHz
Number of transistors	1508 Million	1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	10 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	24.91
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.7972 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	16
TMUs	no data	24

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 size	large	large
Interface	no data	PCIe 3.0 x4
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1020 MHz	1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	48.06 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 Connectors

no data

Portable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX	10	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	no data	6.7 (6.4)
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	3.0
Vulkan	-	1.3
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. 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.

GTX 285M SLI 4.14

GeForce MX250 6.25
+51%

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.

GTX 285M SLI 11233

GeForce MX250 16488
+46.8%

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

60
+173%

−173%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

7−8

−100%

14
+100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −58.3%	19 +58.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −333%	13 +333%
Battlefield 5	10−11 −110%	21 +110%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −100%	18 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −57.1%	11 +57.1%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −144%	22 +144%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −125%	27 +125%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −84%	46 +84%
Hitman 3	10−11 −60%	16 +60%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −321%	118 +321%
Metro Exodus	9−10 −178%	25 +178%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −155%	28 +155%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −119%	35 +119%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −76.7%	76 +76.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −100%	24 +100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Battlefield 5	10−11 −70%	17 +70%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −88.9%	17 +88.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −111%	19 +111%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −41.7%	17 +41.7%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −72%	43 +72%
Hitman 3	10−11 −60%	16 +60%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −311%	115 +311%
Metro Exodus	9−10 −111%	19 +111%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −45.5%	16 +45.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −37.5%	22 +37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −25%	20−22 +25%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −65.1%	71 +65.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +71.4%	7 −71.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −33.3%	12 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −44.4%	13 +44.4%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +56.3%	16 −56.3%
Hitman 3	10−11 −30%	12−14 +30%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +75%	16 −75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +0%	16 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +33.3%	12 −33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −18.6%	50−55 +18.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12

−63.6%

18
+63.6%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −50%	12−14 +50%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −233%	20−22 +233%
Hitman 3	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −40%	14−16 +40%
Metro Exodus	0−1	6−7
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 −53.8%	40−45 +53.8%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9

−37.5%

10−12
+37.5%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Hitman 3	0−1	2−3
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

−40%

7−8
+40%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

4K
High Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

3−4

+0%

3−4

+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

1−2

+0%

1−2

+0%

This is how GTX 285M SLI and GeForce MX250 compete in popular games:

GTX 285M SLI is 173% faster in 1080p

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

in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 285M SLI is 75% faster.
in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce MX250 is 1500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 285M SLI is ahead in 4 tests (6%)
GeForce MX250 is ahead in 60 tests (87%)
there's a draw in 5 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.14	6.25
Recency	2 March 2009	20 February 2019
Chip lithography	55 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	10 Watt

GeForce MX250 has a 51% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 1400% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX250 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 285M SLI in performance tests.

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