GeForce MX250 vs GTX 670MX

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 670MX and GeForce MX250, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 670MX
2012
3 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
5.06

MX250 outperforms GTX 670MX by a significant 24% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking627577
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.7043.56
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGK104GP108B
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 October 2012 (12 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 cores960384
Core clock speed600 MHz937 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1038 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate48.0824.91
Floating-point processing power1.154 TFLOPS0.7972 TFLOPS
ROPs2416
TMUs8024

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 sizelargelarge
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x4
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount3 GB2 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth67.2 GB/s48.06 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolutionUp to 2048x1536no 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.

DirectX12 API12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.7 (6.4)
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.13.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
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 670MX 5.06
GeForce MX250 6.25
+23.5%

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.

GTX 670MX 1951
GeForce MX250 2412
+23.6%

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.

GTX 670MX 3587
GeForce MX250 4633
+29.2%

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 670MX 14530
GeForce MX250 16488
+13.5%

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.

GTX 670MX 2371
GeForce MX250 3660
+54.4%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 670MX 6047
GeForce MX250 9238
+52.8%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

GTX 670MX 5316
GeForce MX250 9392
+76.7%

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.

GTX 670MX 34
GeForce MX250 44
+27.1%

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 HD40
+81.8%
22
−81.8%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−75%
14
+75%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−35.7%
19
+35.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−160%
13
+160%
Battlefield 5 12−14
−61.5%
21
+61.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
−63.6%
18
+63.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−37.5%
11
+37.5%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−100%
22
+100%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−92.9%
27
+92.9%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−43.8%
46
+43.8%
Hitman 3 10−12
−45.5%
16
+45.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
−269%
118
+269%
Metro Exodus 12−14
−108%
25
+108%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−115%
28
+115%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
−94.4%
35
+94.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−65.2%
76
+65.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−71.4%
24
+71.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Battlefield 5 12−14
−30.8%
17
+30.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
−54.5%
17
+54.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−72.7%
19
+72.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−21.4%
17
+21.4%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−34.4%
43
+34.4%
Hitman 3 10−12
−45.5%
16
+45.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
−259%
115
+259%
Metro Exodus 12−14
−58.3%
19
+58.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−23.1%
16
+23.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
−22.2%
22
+22.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
−11.1%
20−22
+11.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−54.3%
71
+54.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+100%
7
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
−9.1%
12
+9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−18.2%
13
+18.2%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+100%
16
−100%
Hitman 3 10−12
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+100%
16
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+12.5%
16
−12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+50%
12
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−10.9%
50−55
+10.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−38.5%
18
+38.5%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−81.8%
20−22
+81.8%
Hitman 3 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−25%
40−45
+25%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hitman 3 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 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 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

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
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how GTX 670MX and GeForce MX250 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 670MX is 82% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 670MX is 100% faster.
  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX250 is 269% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 670MX is ahead in 5 tests (7%)
  • GeForce MX250 is ahead in 63 tests (89%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.06 6.25
Recency 1 October 2012 20 February 2019
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 10 Watt

GTX 670MX has a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GeForce MX250, on the other hand, has a 23.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 650% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX250 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 670MX 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 GTX 670MX
GeForce GTX 670MX
NVIDIA GeForce MX250
GeForce MX250

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.


4 51 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 670MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 1545 votes

Rate GeForce MX250 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.