CPU
GPU
GeForce MX150
Popular choices:
Radeon R7 250X
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The GeForce MX150 is positioned at rank #304 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce MX150
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R7 250X is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.8% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce MX150.
| Insight | GeForce MX150 | Radeon R7 250X |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R7 250X offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R7 250X holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $60), it costs 50% less, resulting in a 101.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce MX150 | Radeon R7 250X |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+101.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($60) | ✅More affordable ($30) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce MX150 and Radeon R7 250X
GeForce MX150
The GeForce MX150 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 937 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 10W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,252 points.
Radeon R7 250X
The Radeon R7 250X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in February 13 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 80W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,269 points. Launch price was $99.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce MX150 scores 2,252 and the Radeon R7 250X reaches 2,269 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce MX150 is built on Pascal while the Radeon R7 250X uses GCN 1.0, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce MX150) vs 640 (Radeon R7 250X). Raw compute: 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce MX150) vs 1.216 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 250X). Boost clocks: 1038 MHz vs 1000 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce MX150 | Radeon R7 250X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,252 | 2,269 |
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 640+67% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7972 TFLOPS | 1.216 TFLOPS+53% |
| Boost Clock | 1038 MHz+4% | 1000 MHz |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 24 | 40+67% |
| L1 Cache | 144 KB | 160 KB+11% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce MX150 | Radeon R7 250X |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Memory bandwidth: 48 GB/s (GeForce MX150) vs 72 GB/s (Radeon R7 250X) — a 50% advantage for the Radeon R7 250X. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GeForce MX150) vs 256 KB (Radeon R7 250X) — the GeForce MX150 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce MX150 | Radeon R7 250X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 48 GB/s | 72 GB/s+50% |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce MX150) vs 12 (FL 11_1) (Radeon R7 250X). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce MX150 | Radeon R7 250X |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (FL 11_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.4+17% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3+50% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No (GeForce MX150) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon R7 250X). Decoder: NVDEC (Pascal) vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: H.264,HEVC,VP9,VC-1 (GeForce MX150) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 (Radeon R7 250X).
| Feature | GeForce MX150 | Radeon R7 250X |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC (Pascal) | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,HEVC,VP9,VC-1 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce MX150 draws 10W versus the Radeon R7 250X's 80W — a 155.6% difference. The GeForce MX150 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce MX150) vs 400W (Radeon R7 250X). Power connectors: Mobile vs 1x 6-pin. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | GeForce MX150 | Radeon R7 250X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 10W-88% | 80W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-13% | 400W |
| Power Connector | Mobile | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | — | 210mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 70°C-7% |
| Perf/Watt | 225.2+693% | 28.4 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce MX150 launched at $150 MSRP and currently averages $60, while the Radeon R7 250X launched at $99 and now averages $30. The Radeon R7 250X costs 50% less ($30 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 37.5 (GeForce MX150) vs 75.6 (Radeon R7 250X) — the Radeon R7 250X offers 101.6% better value. The GeForce MX150 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2014).
| Feature | GeForce MX150 | Radeon R7 250X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $150 | $99-34% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $60 | $30-50% |
| Performance per Dollar | 37.5 | 75.6+102% |
| Codename | GP108 | Cape Verde |
| Release | May 17 2017 | February 13 2014 |
| Ranking | #657 | #655 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce MX150 and Radeon R7 250X
