GeForce MX250 vs G210M

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated577
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data43.63
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGT218GP108B
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 June 2009 (15 years ago)20 February 2019 (5 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 cores16384
Core clock speed625 MHz937 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1038 MHz
Number of transistors260 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate5.00024.91
Floating-point processing power0.048 TFLOPS0.7972 TFLOPS
Gigaflops72no data
ROPs416
TMUs824

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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x4
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amountUp to 1 GB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 500 (DDR2), Up to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/s48.06 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVIDisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVIVGAPortable Device Dependent
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power management8.0no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.7 (6.4)
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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 G210M 116
GeForce MX250 2413
+1980%

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 G210M 1021
GeForce MX250 16488
+1515%

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 G210M 1805
GeForce MX250 21545
+1094%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 June 2009 20 February 2019
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 10 Watt

GeForce MX250 has an age advantage of 9 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 40% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce G210M and GeForce MX250. We've got no test results to judge.


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

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 G210M
GeForce G210M
NVIDIA GeForce MX250
GeForce MX250

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.8 78 votes

Rate GeForce G210M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 1544 votes

Rate GeForce MX250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.