Radeon 540 vs GeForce MX250

Place in performance ranking	546	685
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.37	0.29
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	N17S-G2	Lexa
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	20 February 2019 (5 years ago)	26 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$79
Current price	$1165	$1233 (15.6x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GeForce MX250 has 717% better value for money than Radeon 540.

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 cores	384	512
Core clock speed	1518 MHz	1100 MHz
Boost clock speed	1582 MHz	1124 MHz
Number of transistors	1,800 million	2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10/25 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	24.91	35.97

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce MX250 and Radeon 540 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x4	PCIe 3.0 x8
Length	no data	145 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	7000 MHz	7000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	48.06 GB/s	56 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	No outputs	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	6.4	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.2	1.2.131
CUDA	6.1	no data

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.

GeForce MX250 6.27
+78.1%

Radeon 540 3.52

GeForce MX250 outperforms Radeon 540 by 78% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GeForce MX250 2425
+78.2%

Radeon 540 1361

GeForce MX250 outperforms Radeon 540 by 78% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GeForce MX250 9135
+34.5%

Radeon 540 6791

GeForce MX250 outperforms Radeon 540 by 35% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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

23
+91.7%

12−14

−91.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

+100%

7−8
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	19 +90%	10−11 −90%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	13 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Battlefield 5	21 +110%	10−11 −110%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18 +80%	10−11 −80%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Far Cry 5	22 +83.3%	12−14 −83.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	27 +92.9%	14−16 −92.9%
Forza Horizon 4	31 +93.8%	16−18 −93.8%
Hitman 3	14−16 +100%	7−8 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	37 +106%	18−20 −106%
Metro Exodus	25 +78.6%	14−16 −78.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	28 +100%	14−16 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	29 +81.3%	16−18 −81.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	13 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Battlefield 5	17 +88.9%	9−10 −88.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18 +80%	10−11 −80%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Far Cry 5	40 +90.5%	21−24 −90.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	17 +88.9%	9−10 −88.9%
Forza Horizon 4	24 +100%	12−14 −100%
Hitman 3	8 +100%	4−5 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	26 +85.7%	14−16 −85.7%
Metro Exodus	18 +80%	10−11 −80%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21 +110%	10−11 −110%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	15 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21 +110%	10−11 −110%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7 +133%	3−4 −133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12 +100%	6−7 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Far Cry 5	13 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Forza Horizon 4	16 +100%	8−9 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16 +100%	8−9 −100%
Metro Exodus	17 +88.9%	9−10 −88.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12 +100%	6−7 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18
+80%

10−11

−80%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Hitman 3	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +100%	7−8 −100%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Hitman 3	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Battlefield 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%