GeForce MX250 vs Quadro FX 350M

Place in the ranking	1440	577
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	0.51	43.58
Architecture	Curie (2003−2013)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	G72	GP108B
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	13 March 2006 (18 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 cores	7	384
Core clock speed	450 MHz	937 MHz
Boost clock speed	450 MHz	1038 MHz
Number of transistors	112 million	1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	90 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	10 Watt
Texture fill rate	1.800	24.91
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.7972 TFLOPS
ROPs	2	16
TMUs	4	24

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
Interface	PCIe 1.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x4
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	GDDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	450 MHz	1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14.4 GB/s	48.06 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 Connectors

No outputs

Portable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX	9.0c (9_3)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	3.0	6.7 (6.4)
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	N/A	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
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.

FX 350M 0.11

GeForce MX250 6.25
+5582%

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.

FX 350M 44

GeForce MX250 2412
+5382%

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

-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

2−3

−600%

14
+600%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −533%	19 +533%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −800%	18 +800%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −450%	11 +450%
Hitman 3	4−5 −300%	16 +300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −1375%	118 +1375%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −775%	35 +775%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −171%	76 +171%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −700%	24 +700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −750%	17 +750%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −400%	10−11 +400%
Hitman 3	4−5 −300%	16 +300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −1338%	115 +1338%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −450%	22 +450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −122%	20−22 +122%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −154%	71 +154%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −133%	7 +133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −500%	12 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −400%	10−11 +400%
Hitman 3	4−5 −225%	12−14 +225%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −100%	16 +100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −300%	16 +300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −33.3%	12 +33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −82.1%	50−55 +82.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	3−4
Hitman 3	6−7 −66.7%	10−11 +66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2−3 −600%	14−16 +600%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−450%

10−12
+450%

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%
Far Cry New Dawn	27 +0%	27 +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%
Far Cry New Dawn	17 +0%	17 +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

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +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%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +0%	40−45 +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%

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

in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce MX250 is 1375% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GeForce MX250 is ahead in 29 tests (42%)
there's a draw in 40 tests (58%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.11	6.25
Recency	13 March 2006	20 February 2019
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	2 GB
Chip lithography	90 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	10 Watt

GeForce MX250 has a 5581.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 542.9% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX250 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 350M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 350M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce MX250 is a mobile workstation one.

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