Radeon RX 6800 XT vs GeForce MX250

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX250 with Radeon RX 6800 XT, including specs and performance data.

GeForce MX250
2019
2 GB GDDR5, 10 Watt
6.16

RX 6800 XT outperforms MX250 by a whopping 941% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking58931
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data50.66
Power efficiency42.9414.90
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGP108BNavi 21
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date20 February 2019 (5 years ago)28 October 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores3844608
Core clock speed937 MHz1825 MHz
Boost clock speed1038 MHz2250 MHz
Number of transistors1,800 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate24.91648.0
Floating-point processing power0.7972 TFLOPS20.74 TFLOPS
ROPs16128
TMUs24288
Ray Tracing Coresno data72

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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x4PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB16 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth48.06 GB/s512.0 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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.7 (6.4)6.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.1
Vulkan1.31.2
CUDA6.1-

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.

GeForce MX250 6.16
RX 6800 XT 64.14
+941%

  • Other tests
    • Passmark
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Vantage Performance
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
    • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
    • 3DMark Ice Storm GPU

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 2400
RX 6800 XT 24980
+941%

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.

GeForce MX250 4633
RX 6800 XT 52046
+1023%

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.

GeForce MX250 16488
RX 6800 XT 96516
+485%

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.

GeForce MX250 3660
RX 6800 XT 49735
+1259%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GeForce MX250 21545
RX 6800 XT 193053
+796%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GeForce MX250 235421
RX 6800 XT 504438
+114%

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 HD23
−800%
207
+800%
1440p14−16
−971%
150
+971%
4K9−10
−1011%
100
+1011%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.14
1440pno data4.33
4Kno data6.49

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
Atomic Heart 27
−593%
180−190
+593%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−1077%
150−160
+1077%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
−964%
140−150
+964%
Atomic Heart 20
−835%
180−190
+835%
Battlefield 5 24
−696%
191
+696%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−1077%
150−160
+1077%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
−1255%
140−150
+1255%
Far Cry 5 19
−653%
143
+653%
Fortnite 55
−413%
280−290
+413%
Forza Horizon 4 31
−655%
230−240
+655%
Forza Horizon 5 16
−1000%
170−180
+1000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 28
−532%
170−180
+532%
Valorant 118
−181%
300−350
+181%
Atomic Heart 7
−2571%
180−190
+2571%
Battlefield 5 19
−863%
183
+863%
Counter-Strike 2 5
−2960%
150−160
+2960%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 95−100
−184%
270−280
+184%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−1142%
140−150
+1142%
Dota 2 64
−159%
166
+159%
Far Cry 5 17
−718%
139
+718%
Fortnite 25
−1028%
280−290
+1028%
Forza Horizon 4 24
−875%
230−240
+875%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
−1157%
170−180
+1157%
Grand Theft Auto V 28
−436%
150
+436%
Metro Exodus 7
−2071%
152
+2071%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 23
−670%
170−180
+670%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21
−1300%
294
+1300%
Valorant 115
−189%
300−350
+189%
Battlefield 5 14
−1150%
175
+1150%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−1077%
150−160
+1077%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−1142%
140−150
+1142%
Dota 2 57
−154%
145
+154%
Far Cry 5 16
−713%
130
+713%
Forza Horizon 4 16
−1363%
230−240
+1363%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
−900%
140−150
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 19
−832%
170−180
+832%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
−1233%
160
+1233%
Valorant 65−70
−431%
356
+431%
Fortnite 22
−1182%
280−290
+1182%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
−889%
400−450
+889%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
−1614%
120
+1614%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−1800%
95
+1800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
−373%
170−180
+373%
Valorant 65−70
−488%
350−400
+488%
Battlefield 5 9−10
−1611%
154
+1611%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−900%
80−85
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−1560%
80−85
+1560%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−1091%
131
+1091%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−1314%
190−200
+1314%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
−900%
90−95
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−1411%
130−140
+1411%
Fortnite 12−14
−1158%
150−160
+1158%
Atomic Heart 5−6
−980%
50−55
+980%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 35−40
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−688%
134
+688%
Metro Exodus 0−1 56
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−3567%
110
+3567%
Valorant 30−33
−983%
300−350
+983%
Battlefield 5 4−5
−2475%
103
+2475%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 35−40
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1900%
40−45
+1900%
Dota 2 21−24
−481%
122
+481%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1483%
95
+1483%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−1544%
140−150
+1544%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−1500%
95−100
+1500%
Fortnite 6−7
−1217%
75−80
+1217%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

This is how GeForce MX250 and RX 6800 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6800 XT is 800% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6800 XT is 971% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6800 XT is 1011% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6800 XT is 3567% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6800 XT is ahead in 60 tests (98%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.16 64.14
Recency 20 February 2019 28 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 300 Watt

GeForce MX250 has 2900% lower power consumption.

RX 6800 XT, on the other hand, has a 941.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6800 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX250 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX250 is a notebook card while Radeon RX 6800 XT is a desktop one.

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 MX250
GeForce MX250
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT
Radeon RX 6800 XT

Other comparisons

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.


3.6
1580 votes

Rate GeForce MX250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3
3704 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6800 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce MX250 or Radeon RX 6800 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.