
GeForce MX250 vs P106-090

GeForce MX250
Popular choices:

P106-090
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. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce MX250 is positioned at rank 291 and the P106-090 is on rank 184, so the P106-090 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce MX250
Performance Per Dollar P106-090
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce MX250 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce MX250 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The P106-090 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The P106-090 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.8% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce MX250.
| Insight | GeForce MX250 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.8%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.8%) |
| Longevity | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | Standard Size (250mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The P106-090 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $30 versus $150 for the GeForce MX250, it costs 80% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 419.2% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce MX250 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+419.2%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) | ✅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 MX250 and P106-090

GeForce MX250
The GeForce MX250 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 20 2019. 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: 2,375 points.

P106-090
The P106-090 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 31 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1354 MHz to 1531 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,466 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce MX250 scores 2,375 and the P106-090 reaches 2,466 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce MX250 is built on Pascal while the P106-090 uses Pascal, both on 14 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce MX250) vs 768 (P106-090). Raw compute: 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce MX250) vs 2.352 TFLOPS (P106-090). Boost clocks: 1038 MHz vs 1531 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce MX250 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,375 | 2,466+4% |
| Architecture | Pascal | Pascal |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 768+100% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7972 TFLOPS | 2.352 TFLOPS+195% |
| Boost Clock | 1038 MHz | 1531 MHz+47% |
| ROPs | 16 | 48+200% |
| TMUs | 24 | 48+100% |
| L1 Cache | 144 KB | 288 KB+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1.5 MB+200% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce MX250 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (GeForce MX250) vs 1.5 MB (P106-090) — the P106-090 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce MX250 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1.5 MB+200% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce MX250) vs 12 (P106-090). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 0.
| Feature | GeForce MX250 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.4+17% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce MX250) vs NVENC (Pascal) (P106-090). Decoder: NVDEC 3rd Gen vs NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9 (GeForce MX250) vs H.264,H.265,VP9 (P106-090).
| Feature | GeForce MX250 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | NVENC (Pascal) |
| Decoder | NVDEC 3rd Gen | NVDEC |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9 | H.264,H.265,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce MX250 draws 10W versus the P106-090's 75W — a 152.9% difference. The GeForce MX250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce MX250) vs 350W (P106-090). Power connectors: Mobile vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 250mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 60°C.
| Feature | GeForce MX250 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 10W-87% | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Mobile | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 250mm |
| Height | 0mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | 60°C-20% |
| Perf/Watt | 237.5+622% | 32.9 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce MX250 launched at $150 MSRP and currently averages $150, while the P106-090 launched at $389 and now averages $30. The P106-090 costs 80% less ($120 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 15.8 (GeForce MX250) vs 82.2 (P106-090) — the P106-090 offers 420.3% better value. The GeForce MX250 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2017).
| Feature | GeForce MX250 | P106-090 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $150-61% | $389 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150 | $30-80% |
| Performance per Dollar | 15.8 | 82.2+420% |
| Codename | GP108B | GP106 |
| Release | February 20 2019 | July 31 2017 |
| Ranking | #643 | #639 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












