P106-090 vs GeForce MX250

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 P106-090 is positioned at rank 184 and the GeForce MX250 is on rank 291, so the P106-090 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar P106-090

#81

Tesla T10

MSRP: $2000|Avg: $975

99%

#82

RTX A5000

MSRP: $3721|Avg: $1800

97%

#83

Radeon Pro Vega 64X

MSRP: $2200|Avg: $2200

96%

#84

Radeon PRO V710

MSRP: $2000|Avg: $2000

95%

#85

RTX A5500

MSRP: $3600|Avg: $2200

92%

#86

Radeon Pro WX 9100

MSRP: $2199|Avg: $550

88%

#168

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

2330%

#183

FirePro W7100

MSRP: $799|Avg: $114

100%

#184

P106-090

MSRP: $389|Avg: $30

100%

#185

Radeon Pro WX 4130

MSRP: $300|Avg: $100

99%

#187

Tesla M6

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $84

98%

#189

CMP 30HX

MSRP: $799|Avg: $60

97%

#190

FirePro W2100

MSRP: $139|Avg: $30

97%

#192

FirePro M6000

MSRP: $300|Avg: $50

96%

#195

FirePro M4170

MSRP: $200|Avg: $80

92%

#196

GRID K140Q

MSRP: $125|Avg: $500

92%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce MX250

#61

GeForce RTX 2070 (móvel)

MSRP: $800|Avg: $350

98%

#62

GeForce RTX 2080 (móvel)

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $350

95%

#281

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

686%

#283

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

622%

#284

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

620%

#288

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

564%

#289

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

560%

#291

GeForce MX250

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

100%

#292

Radeon 630

MSRP: $100|Avg: $50

99%

#293

GeForce MX330

MSRP: $150|Avg: $100

99%

#297

Radeon RX 780

MSRP: $499|Avg: $721

97%

#300

GeForce 940MX

MSRP: $100|Avg: $50

95%

#301

GeForce MX130

MSRP: $120|Avg: $50

95%

#302

Arc Graphics 130V

MSRP: $300|Avg: $250

95%

#303

Radeon R5 430

MSRP: $59|Avg: $50

95%

#304

GeForce MX150

MSRP: $150|Avg: $60

95%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

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	P106-090	GeForce MX250
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+3.8%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.8%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021))	Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
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	P106-090	GeForce MX250
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+419.2%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($30)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150)

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.

P106-090 Benchmark Check

GeForce MX250 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of P106-090 and GeForce MX250

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.

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.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The P106-090 scores 2,466 and the GeForce MX250 reaches 2,375 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The P106-090 is built on Pascal while the GeForce MX250 uses Pascal, both on 16 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 768 (P106-090) vs 384 (GeForce MX250). Raw compute: 2.352 TFLOPS (P106-090) vs 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce MX250). Boost clocks: 1531 MHz vs 1038 MHz.

Feature	P106-090	GeForce MX250
G3D Mark Score	2,466+4%	2,375
Architecture	Pascal	Pascal
Process Node	16 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	768+100%	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.352 TFLOPS+195%	0.7972 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1531 MHz+47%	1038 MHz
ROPs	48+200%	16
TMUs	48+100%	24
L1 Cache	288 KB+100%	144 KB
L2 Cache	1.5 MB+200%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	P106-090	GeForce MX250
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: 1.5 MB (P106-090) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce MX250) — the P106-090 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	P106-090	GeForce MX250
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	1.5 MB+200%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (P106-090) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce MX250). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 3.

Feature	P106-090	GeForce MX250
DirectX	12	12 (12_1)
Vulkan	1.4+17%	1.2
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	0	3

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (Pascal) (P106-090) vs None (GeForce MX250). Decoder: NVDEC vs NVDEC 3rd Gen. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9 (P106-090) vs H.264,H.265,VP9 (GeForce MX250).

Feature	P106-090	GeForce MX250
Encoder	NVENC (Pascal)	None
Decoder	NVDEC	NVDEC 3rd Gen
Codecs	H.264,H.265,VP9	H.264,H.265,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The P106-090 draws 75W versus the GeForce MX250's 10W — a 152.9% difference. The GeForce MX250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (P106-090) vs 350W (GeForce MX250). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Mobile. Card length: 250mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 60°C vs 75.

Feature	P106-090	GeForce MX250
TDP	75W	10W-87%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Mobile
Length	250mm	0mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	60°C-20%	75
Perf/Watt	32.9	237.5+622%

💰

Value Analysis

The P106-090 launched at $389 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the GeForce MX250 launched at $150 and now averages $150. The P106-090 costs 80% less ($120 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 82.2 (P106-090) vs 15.8 (GeForce MX250) — the P106-090 offers 420.3% better value. The GeForce MX250 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2017).