Iris Xe Graphics MAX vs GeForce MX250

Place in the ranking	579	623
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	42.80	14.02
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code name	GP108B	DG1
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	20 February 2019 (5 years ago)	31 October 2020 (4 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	384	768
Core clock speed	937 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1038 MHz	1650 MHz
Number of transistors	1,800 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	25 Watt
Texture fill rate	24.91	79.20
Floating-point processing power	0.7972 TFLOPS	2.534 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	24
TMUs	24	48

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	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x4	PCIe 4.0 x4
Width	no data	IGP
Supplementary power connectors	None	no 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 type	GDDR5	LPDDR4X
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1502 MHz	4.3 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	48.06 GB/s	68.26 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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

Portable Device Dependent

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.7 (6.4)	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	3.0
Vulkan	1.3	1.2
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.

GeForce MX250 6.24
+22.1%

Iris Xe Graphics MAX 5.11

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.

GeForce MX250 2406
+22.1%

Iris Xe Graphics MAX 1971

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

22
+22.2%

18−20

−22.2%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14
+40%

10−11

−40%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	19 +35.7%	14−16 −35.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	13 +30%	10−11 −30%
Battlefield 5	21 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18 +28.6%	14−16 −28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +22.2%	9−10 −22.2%
Far Cry 5	22 +22.2%	18−20 −22.2%
Far Cry New Dawn	27 +28.6%	21−24 −28.6%
Forza Horizon 4	46 +31.4%	35−40 −31.4%
Hitman 3	16 +33.3%	12−14 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	118 +24.2%	95−100 −24.2%
Metro Exodus	25 +38.9%	18−20 −38.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	28 +33.3%	21−24 −33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35 +29.6%	27−30 −29.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	76 +26.7%	60−65 −26.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24 +33.3%	18−20 −33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Battlefield 5	17 +41.7%	12−14 −41.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	17 +41.7%	12−14 −41.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Far Cry 5	19 +35.7%	14−16 −35.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	17 +41.7%	12−14 −41.7%
Forza Horizon 4	43 +22.9%	35−40 −22.9%
Hitman 3	16 +33.3%	12−14 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	115 +27.8%	90−95 −27.8%
Metro Exodus	19 +35.7%	14−16 −35.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16 +33.3%	12−14 −33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	22 +22.2%	18−20 −22.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 +25%	16−18 −25%
Watch Dogs: Legion	71 +29.1%	55−60 −29.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7 +40%	5−6 −40%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12 +33.3%	9−10 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Far Cry 5	13 +30%	10−11 −30%
Forza Horizon 4	16 +33.3%	12−14 −33.3%
Hitman 3	12−14 +30%	10−11 −30%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16 +33.3%	12−14 −33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16 +33.3%	12−14 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12 +33.3%	9−10 −33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +27.5%	40−45 −27.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18
+28.6%

14−16

−28.6%

1440p
High Preset

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

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +25%	16−18 −25%
Hitman 3	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +40%	10−11 −40%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +33.3%	30−33 −33.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12

+22.2%

9−10
−22.2%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Hitman 3	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +33.3%	12−14 −33.3%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+40%

5−6

−40%

This is how GeForce MX250 and Iris Xe Graphics MAX compete in popular games:

GeForce MX250 is 22% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.24	5.11
Recency	20 February 2019	31 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	25 Watt

GeForce MX250 has a 22.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 150% lower power consumption.

Iris Xe Graphics MAX, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce MX250 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics MAX in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX250 is a notebook card while Iris Xe Graphics MAX is a desktop one.

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