NVIDIA GeForce MX250 vs Intel Iris Xe MAX
The Iris Xe MAX has 77% better performance than the GeForce MX250 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
We do not have any performance per dollar data for the GeForce MX250 and the Iris Xe MAX for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
Summary
About the NVIDIA GeForce MX250 GPU
The GeForce MX250 is an end-of-life mobile graphics card by NVIDIA. It launched in Q1 2019. Its GP108B chip that powers the GPU uses the Pascal architecture and is fabricated on the 14 nm process.
Memory
This GPU is paired with 2 GB of GDDR5 VRAM. Its 1,502 MHz memory clock and 64 bit interface gives it a bandwidth of 48.06 Gb/s. This impacts how much data it can store, and how fast it transfers the data to and from memory.
Compatibility
This mobile card has a TDP of 10 W.
Benchmark Performance
The GeForce MX250 has the 256th highest 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 540 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 4.42% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.
About the Intel Iris Xe MAX GPU
The Iris Xe MAX is a mobile graphics card by Intel. It launched in Q4 2020. Its DG1 chip that powers the GPU uses the Generation 12.1 architecture and is fabricated on the 10 nm process.
Memory
This GPU is paired with 4 GB of LPDDR4X VRAM. Its 2,133 MHz memory clock and 128 bit interface gives it a bandwidth of 68.26 Gb/s. This impacts how much data it can store, and how fast it transfers the data to and from memory.
Compatibility
This mobile card has a TDP of 25 W. Intel recommends using a power supply of at least 200 W with this card. A power supply lower than this might result in system crashes and potentially damage your hardware.
Benchmark Performance
The Iris Xe MAX has the 200th highest 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 540 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 7.83% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.
General Info
General overview of the GPU, including details like its manufacturer, release date, launch price, and current production status.
| Info | GeForce MX250 | Iris Xe MAX |
|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | NVIDIA | Intel |
| Architecture | Pascal | Generation 12.1 |
| Market Segment | Mobile | Mobile |
| Release Date | Q1 2019 | Q4 2020 |
| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |
| Shop | Check Price | Check Price |
Gaming Performance
Select a game to compare FPS metrics
FPS Benchmarks
This table showcases the average frame rate (FPS) achieved both GPUs in at various resolutions. Frame rate is a crucial indicator of how smoothly the GPU can run the game. A higher FPS generally translates to a smoother gameplay experience.
- Frames Per Second
Sons of the Forest | GeForce MX250 | Iris Xe MAX |
|---|---|---|
| Low - 1080p | 20 FPS | -- |
| Medium - 1080p | 11 FPS | -- |
| High - 1080p | -- | -- |
| Ultra - 1080p | -- | -- |
| QHD - 1440p | -- | -- |
| 4K UHD - 2160p | -- | -- |
Compare Frames Per Second (FPS)
The average frame rate (FPS) in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, higher FPS results in a smoother gameplay experience.
| GPU | Frames Per Second | |
|---|---|---|
| GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) | 22.2 | +107% |
| Radeon RX 560X (Mobile) | 21.5 | +101% |
| Radeon 660M | 16.7 | +56% |
| GeForce MX350 | 13.8 | +29% |
| GeForce MX250 | 10.7 | |
| Radeon RX 550 (Mobile) | 8.73 | -18% |
Compare Cost Per Frame
The average cost per frame in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. Generally, a lower cost per frame implies better value for your money.
| GPU | Cost Per Frame | |
|---|---|---|
| Our database does not have enough data to compare the FPS per dollar with other GPUs. | ||
Benchmark Performance
The Iris Xe MAX has 77% better performance than the GeForce MX250 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
The GeForce MX250 is ranked 256th with a score of 4,633, and the Iris Xe MAX is ranked 200th with a score of 8,214.
We do not have any performance per dollar data for the GeForce MX250 and the Iris Xe MAX for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
Relative Performance
The average score in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
| GPU | Benchmark Performance | |
|---|---|---|
| Quadro M3000M | 8,288.5 | +79% |
| GeForce MX450 | 8,250 | +78% |
| Iris Xe MAX | 8,214 | +77% |
| Radeon RX 560X (Mobile) | 8,211.5 | +77% |
| Quadro P2000 Mobile | 8,148 | +76% |
| Radeon R9 M280X | 4,698 | +1% |
| Radeon RX 540 (Mobile) | 4,646 | +0% |
| GeForce MX250 | 4,633 | |
| Radeon RX 550 (Mobile) | 4,559 | -2% |
| Radeon Pro 450 | 4,502 | -3% |
Relative Value For Money
The average performance per dollar in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. A higher score implies a better value for your money.
| GPU | Performance Per Dollar | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Our database does not have enough data to compare the benchmark performance per dollar with other GPUs. | |||
Benchmark Scores
This table showcases the average performance scores achieved by both GPUs across industry-standard benchmark tests. These scores provide a valuable insight into overall performance. Powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
- Popular
| Benchmark | GeForce MX250 | Iris Xe MAX |
|---|---|---|
| 3DMark Time Spy Graphics | 1,103 | 1,743 (+58.02%) |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 1,220.5 | 1,876 (+53.71%) |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics | 21,545 | 36,993 (+71.7%) |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics | 3,660 | 6,333 (+73.03%) |
| 3DMark Night Raid Graphics | -- | 20,649.5 |
| 3DMark 11 Performance Score | 4,850 | 8,024 (+65.44%) |
| Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit | 99.6 | 105 (+5.42%) |
| PassMark G3D Mark | 2,422 (+22.82%) | 1,972 |
| PassMark G2D Mark | 241 | 309 (+28.22%) |
| Unigine Heaven 3.0 DirectX 11 | 43.6 | -- |
| Unigine Heaven 3.0 OpenGL | 43.7 | -- |
Technical Specs
Graphics Processor
General information about the graphics processing unit like their architecture, manufacturing process size, and transistor count. Newer GPU architectures generally bring efficiency improvements and may introduce technologies that enhance graphical capabilities.
| Spec | GeForce MX250 | Iris Xe MAX |
|---|---|---|
| Codename | GP108B | DG1 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Generation 12.1 |
| Process Size | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Transistors | 1,800 million | -- |
Memory Details
Memory specifications like their capacity, bandwidth, and clock speeds. GPU memory stores graphics data like frames, textures, and shadows which helps display rendered images. These specs are crucial for graphics-intense applications like gaming and 3D modeling.
| Spec | GeForce MX250 | Iris Xe MAX |
|---|---|---|
| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | LPDDR4X |
| Memory Bandwidth | 48.06 Gb/s | 68.26 Gb/s |
| Memory Clock | 1,502 MHz | 2,133 MHz |
| Memory Interface | 64 bit | 128 bit |
| L1 Cache | 48 KB | -- |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 1,024 KB |
Board Compatibility
Compatibility information like their slot size, bus interface, power consumption, and display support. These specs are useful for verifying compatibility with your motherboard, power supply, and monitor.
| Spec | GeForce MX250 | Iris Xe MAX |
|---|---|---|
| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x4 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 W | 25 W |
| Suggested PSU | -- | 200 W |
| Outputs | Device Dependent | No outputs |
Cores & Clock Speeds
Processing power information like its cores and clock speed. These specs impact how fast they can process graphics. Each type of core or component serves a specific computational purpose.
| Spec | GeForce MX250 | Iris Xe MAX |
|---|---|---|
| Shading Units | -- | 768 |
| CUDA Cores | 384 | -- |
| Execution Units (EU) | -- | 96 |
| Stream Multiprocessors (SM) | 3 | -- |
| Texture Mapping Units (TMU) | 24 | 48 |
| Render Output Units (ROP) | 16 | 24 |
| Core Clock Speed | 937 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Core Clock Speed (Boost) | 1,038 MHz | 1,650 MHz |
Theoretical Performance
Theoretical performance numbers derived from the raw specifications of the different components like core count and clock speeds. While these provide a glimpse into peak processing power, they do not represent real-world performance.
| Spec | GeForce MX250 | Iris Xe MAX |
|---|---|---|
| Pixel Fill Rate | 16.61 GPixel/s | 39.6 GPixel/s |
| Texture Fill Rate | 24.91 GTexel/s | 79.2 GTexel/s |
| FP32 Performance | 797.2 GFLOPS | 2.53 TFLOPS |
| FP64 Performance | 24.91 GFLOPS | 633.6 GFLOPS |
API Support
Graphics API versions supported by these graphics cards. APIs evolve over time, introducing new features and functionalities. Older GPUs may not support recent versions.
| Spec | GeForce MX250 | Iris Xe MAX |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.6 |
Check out these comparisons for similar GPUs:
Looking for alternatives? Check out these similar GPUs:
* Performance rating, performance per dollar, and rankings are based on the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark and MSRP.