GeForce GTX 295 vs GeForce MX250
Find out if it is worth upgrading your current GPU setup by comparing GeForce GTX 295 and GeForce MX250. Here you can take a closer look at graphics cards specs, such as core clock speed, memory type and size, display connectors, etc. The price, overall benchmark and gaming performances are usually defining factors when it comes to choosing between GeForce GTX 295 and GeForce MX250. Make sure that the graphics card has compatible dimensions and will properly fit in your new or current computer case. Also these graphics cards may have different system power recommendations, so take that into consideration and upgrade your PSU if necessary.
GeForce GTX 295
GeForce MX250 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: GeForce MX250 is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with GeForce MX250 here:
Main Specs
| GeForce GTX 295 | GeForce MX250 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 289 Watt | 10 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x4 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin & 8-pin | None |
| Memory type | GDDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1792 MB | 4 GB |
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI | No outputs |
| Check Price |
- GeForce GTX 295 has 2790% more power consumption, than GeForce MX250.
- GeForce GTX 295 is connected by PCIe 2.0 x16, and GeForce MX250 uses PCIe 3.0 x4 interface.
- GeForce GTX 295 has 1788 GB more memory, than GeForce MX250.
- GeForce GTX 295 is used in Desktops, and GeForce MX250 - in Laptops.
- GeForce GTX 295 is build with Tesla 2.0 architecture, and GeForce MX250 - with Pascal.
- Core clock speed of GeForce MX250 is 276 MHz higher, than GeForce GTX 295.
- GeForce GTX 295 is manufactured by 55 nm process technology, and GeForce MX250 - by 14 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of GeForce MX250 is 6001 MHz higher, than GeForce GTX 295.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 3−4 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 27−30 |
| medium / 1080p | 5−6 | 16−18 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 166% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 18−20 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 4−5 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in Battlefield 5 is 163% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| high / 1080p | 30−35 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| GeForce GTX 295 and GeForce MX250 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 190−200 |
| medium / 768p | 90−95 | 160−170 |
| ultra / 1080p | 40−45 | 85−90 |
| QHD / 1440p | 24−27 | 50−55 |
| 4K / 2160p | 18−20 | 30−33 |
| high / 768p | 65−70 | 120−130 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 75% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 80−85 | 55−60 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 40−45 | 45−50 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 2% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 75−80 | 100−110 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 85−90 |
| ultra / 1080p | 27−30 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in Dota 2 is 59% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 5−6 | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| 4K / 2160p | 2−3 | 5−6 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 6−7 | 16−18 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in Far Cry 5 is 157% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 16−18 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 16−18 |
| low / 720p | 50−55 | 90−95 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 45−50 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in Fortnite is 100% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 18−20 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 7−8 |
| low / 720p | 20−22 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 9−10 | 24−27 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in Forza Horizon 4 is 158% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | − | 70−75 |
| high / 1080p | 8−9 | 24−27 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 10−12 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| medium / 720p | 40−45 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in Grand Theft Auto V is 90% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 3−4 | 8−9 |
| ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 6−7 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 8−9 | 24−27 |
| medium / 1080p | 4−5 | 10−12 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in Metro Exodus is 200% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 100−110 |
| high / 1080p | 85−90 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 80−85 | 100−105 |
| medium / 1080p | 85−90 | 100−110 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in Minecraft is 22% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 16−18 |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 50−55 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 66% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 8−9 | 24−27 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 112% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 16−18 | 45−50 |
| medium / 768p | 12−14 | 30−33 |
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 10−11 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 160% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 95−100 |
| medium / 768p | 35−40 | 55−60 |
| ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 30−35 |
| high / 768p | 30−35 | 50−55 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce MX250 in World of Tanks is 53% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
Full Specs
| GeForce GTX 295 | GeForce MX250 | |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Pascal |
| Code name | GT200B | N17S-G2 |
| Type | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 8 January 2009 | 20 February 2019 |
| Pipelines | 240 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 1242 MHz | 1518 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 1582 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 1,400 million | 1,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 14 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 92.2 billion/sec | 24.91 |
| Floating-point performance | 2x 596.2 gflops | |
| Length | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) | |
| Memory bus width | 896 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 999 MHz | 7000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 223.8 GB/s | 48.06 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
| CUDA | + | 6.1 |
| CUDA cores | 480 | |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
| SLI options | + | |
| Multi monitor support | + | |
| HDMI | + | |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | |
| Laptop size | large | |
| CUDA cores per GPU | 240 | |
| Standard memory config per GPU | 896 MB | |
| Memory interface width per GPU | 448 Bit | |
| High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR) | 128bit | |
| Check Price |