Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
NVIDIA GeForce MX250 vs AMD Radeon R9 M390
Price now
no data
Games supported
70%
- Interface
- Core clock speed
- Max video memory 2048
- Memory type GDDR5
- Memory clock speed 0
- Maximum resolution
- Interface PCIe 3.0 x4
- Core clock speed 1518
- Max video memory 4 GB
- Memory type GDDR5
- Memory clock speed 7000
- Maximum resolution
Price now
1165$
Games supported
66%
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance rating | 374 | 488 |
| Value for money | no data | 2.74 |
| Architecture | GCN (2011−2017) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | Pitcairn | N17S-G2 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 9 June 2015 (7 years old) | 20 February 2019 (4 years old) |
| Current price | no data | $1165 |
Value for money
no data
Technical specs
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 | 1024 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 1518 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1582 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5000 Million | 1,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Thermal design power (TDP) | no data | 10/25 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 24.91 |
Dimensions and compatibility
Information on Radeon R9 M390 and GeForce MX250 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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 | large |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x4 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
Memory
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated VRAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 7000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 48.06 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Video outputs and ports
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 data | No outputs |
| Eyefinity | 1 | no data |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| AppAcceleration | - | no data |
| Enduro | - | no data |
| FreeSync | 1 | no data |
| HD3D | + | no data |
| PowerTune | + | no data |
| DualGraphics | 1 | no data |
| TrueAudio | - | no data |
| ZeroCore | + | no data |
| Switchable graphics | 1 | no data |
API support
APIs supported, including particular versions of those APIs.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | Not Listed | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | no data | 1.2 |
| Mantle | + | no data |
| CUDA | no data | 6.1 |
Benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. Note that overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range.
Overall score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. 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.
- 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
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.
Benchmark coverage: 16%
Radeon R9 M390 outperforms GeForce MX250 by 47% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.
Mining hashrates
Cryptocurrency mining performance of Radeon R9 M390 and GeForce MX250. Usually measured in megahashes per second.
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 242 Mh/s | no data |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 43
+79.2%
| 24
−79.2%
|
| 4K | 20 | no data |
Popular games
- Full HD
Low Preset - Full HD
Medium Preset - Full HD
High Preset - Full HD
Ultra Preset - 1440p
High Preset - 1440p
Ultra Preset - 4K
High Preset - 4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+21.4%
|
14
−21.4%
|
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 20−22
+5.3%
|
19
−5.3%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 14−16
+7.7%
|
13
−7.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+37.5%
|
24
−37.5%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 24−27
+13%
|
23
−13%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+54.5%
|
11
−54.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+31.6%
|
19
−31.6%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 24−27
+23.8%
|
21
−23.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+6.5%
|
31
−6.5%
|
| Hitman 3 | 24−27
+66.7%
|
14−16
−66.7%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 18−20
+46.2%
|
13
−46.2%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 16−18
+21.4%
|
14
−21.4%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 21−24
+16.7%
|
18
−16.7%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 16−18
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 20−22
+53.8%
|
13
−53.8%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 14−16
+100%
|
7−8
−100%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+73.7%
|
19
−73.7%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 24−27
+62.5%
|
16
−62.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+54.5%
|
10−12
−54.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+47.1%
|
17
−47.1%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 24−27
+44.4%
|
18
−44.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+37.5%
|
24
−37.5%
|
| Hitman 3 | 24−27
+257%
|
7
−257%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 18−20
+217%
|
6
−217%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
+100%
|
7
−100%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 16−18
+113%
|
8
−113%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 21−24
+90.9%
|
11
−90.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 31
+47.6%
|
21
−47.6%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 16−18
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 20−22
+186%
|
7
−186%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 14−16
+100%
|
7−8
−100%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+136%
|
14
−136%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+54.5%
|
10−12
−54.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+56.3%
|
16
−56.3%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 24−27
+52.9%
|
17
−52.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+106%
|
16
−106%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18
+50%
|
12
−50%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 16−18
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 14−16
+40%
|
10−11
−40%
|
| Hitman 3 | 14−16
+36.4%
|
10−12
−36.4%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 14−16
+40%
|
10−11
−40%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 12−14
+33.3%
|
9−10
−33.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 16−18
+183%
|
6−7
−183%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+50%
|
10−11
−50%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 16−18
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Hitman 3 | 9−10
+50%
|
6−7
−50%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12
+200%
|
4−5
−200%
|
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 10−11
+25%
|
8−9
−25%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance rating | 9.37 | 6.24 |
| Recency | 9 June 2015 | 20 February 2019 |
| Memory bus width | 256 | 64 |
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1024 | 384 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
Judging by the results of synthetic and gaming tests, Technical City recommends
since it shows better performance.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Competitors of Radeon R9 M390 by NVIDIA
We believe that the nearest equivalent to Radeon R9 M390 from NVIDIA is GeForce MX450, which is nearly equal in speed and higher by 2 positions in our rating.
Here are some closest NVIDIA rivals to Radeon R9 M390:
Competitors of GeForce MX250 by AMD
According to our data, the closest equivalent to GeForce MX250 by AMD is Radeon RX 550X Mobile, which is slower by 3% and lower by 2 positions in our rating.
Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce MX250:
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
