GeForce GTS 250M vs Iris Graphics 5100
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Iris Graphics 5100 and GeForce GTS 250M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Graphics 5100 outperforms GTS 250M by a considerable 41% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 976 | 1086 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 4.49 | 3.41 |
| Architecture | Generation 7.5 (2013) | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) |
| GPU code name | Haswell GT3 | GT215 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 27 May 2013 (12 years ago) | 15 June 2009 (16 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 | 320 | 96 |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | 500 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,300 million | 727 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 28 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 44.00 | 16.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.704 TFLOPS | 0.24 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | no data | 360 |
| ROPs | 4 | 8 |
| TMUs | 40 | 32 |
| L2 Cache | no data | 64 KB |
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 | no data | large |
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| SLI options | - | + |
| MXM Type | no data | MXM 3.0 Type-B |
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 | System Shared | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | Up to 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 51.2 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | HDMIVGALVDSSingle Link DVIDisplayPortDual Link DVI |
| HDMI | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | no data | 8.0 |
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 11.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | + | N/A |
| CUDA | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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.
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 | 13
−115%
| 28
+115%
|
| 4K | 7
+75%
| 4−5
−75%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Fortnite | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+25%
|
8−9
−25%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+12.1%
|
30−35
−12.1%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 31
+6.9%
|
27−30
−6.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 18
+12.5%
|
16−18
−12.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Fortnite | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+25%
|
8−9
−25%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+12.1%
|
30−35
−12.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 17
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+25%
|
8−9
−25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+12.1%
|
30−35
−12.1%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
+50%
|
8−9
−50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+38.5%
|
12−14
−38.5%
|
| Valorant | 10−12
+267%
|
3−4
−267%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 9−10
+50%
|
6−7
−50%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 6
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
This is how Iris Graphics 5100 and GTS 250M compete in popular games:
- GTS 250M is 115% faster in 1080p
- Iris Graphics 5100 is 75% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Iris Graphics 5100 is 500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Iris Graphics 5100 performs better in 42 tests (98%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (2%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.75 | 1.24 |
| Recency | 27 May 2013 | 15 June 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 28 Watt |
Iris Graphics 5100 has a 41% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 82% more advanced lithography process.
GTS 250M, on the other hand, has 7% lower power consumption.
The Iris Graphics 5100 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 250M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
