GeForce MX250 vs HD Graphics 3000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 3000 and GeForce MX250, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics 3000
2011
0.66

MX250 outperforms HD Graphics 3000 by a whopping 845% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1187579
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data42.76
ArchitectureGeneration 6.0 (2011)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameSandy Bridge GT2+GP108B
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 February 2011 (13 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 cores96384
Core clock speed650 MHz937 MHz
Boost clock speed1300 MHz1038 MHz
Number of transistors1,160 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown10 Watt
Texture fill rate15.6024.91
Floating-point processing power0.2496 TFLOPS0.7972 TFLOPS
ROPs216
TMUs1224

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
InterfaceRing BusPCIe 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared2 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1502 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data48.06 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentPortable Device Dependent

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)
OpenGL3.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
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.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark 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.

HD Graphics 3000 0.66
GeForce MX250 6.24
+845%

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.

HD Graphics 3000 254
GeForce MX250 2405
+847%

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.

HD Graphics 3000 1568
GeForce MX250 16488
+951%

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.

HD Graphics 3000 2503
GeForce MX250 21545
+761%

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 HD8
−175%
22
+175%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−367%
14
+367%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−375%
19
+375%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−500%
18
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−267%
11
+267%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2600%
27
+2600%
Hitman 3 5−6
−220%
16
+220%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−973%
118
+973%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−483%
35
+483%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−153%
76
+153%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−500%
24
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−467%
17
+467%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1600%
17
+1600%
Hitman 3 5−6
−220%
16
+220%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−945%
115
+945%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−267%
22
+267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−100%
20−22
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−137%
71
+137%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−75%
7
+75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−300%
12
+300%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%
Hitman 3 5−6
−160%
12−14
+160%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−45.5%
16
+45.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−167%
16
+167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−20%
12
+20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−70%
50−55
+70%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 6−7
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−600%
7−8
+600%
Hitman 3 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−1900%
40−45
+1900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−267%
10−12
+267%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 3−4

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+0%
13
+0%
Battlefield 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Far Cry 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 46
+0%
46
+0%
Metro Exodus 25
+0%
25
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 28
+0%
28
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Battlefield 5 17
+0%
17
+0%
Far Cry 5 19
+0%
19
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 43
+0%
43
+0%
Metro Exodus 19
+0%
19
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16
+0%
16
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 13
+0%
13
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+0%
16
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18
+0%
18
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how HD Graphics 3000 and GeForce MX250 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce MX250 is 175% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX250 is 2600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GeForce MX250 is ahead in 35 tests (51%)
  • there's a draw in 34 tests (49%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.66 6.24
Recency 1 February 2011 20 February 2019
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm

GeForce MX250 has a 845.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce MX250 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 3000 in performance tests.


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.


Intel HD Graphics 3000
HD Graphics 3000
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 2438 votes

Rate HD Graphics 3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 1556 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.