NVIDIA
GeForce 840M vs GeForce MX250
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GeForce MX250
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 840M and GeForce MX250 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗GeForce 840M outperforms GeForce MX250 by ~1% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+1%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Equal catalog scores
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider GeForce 840M
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 5.0 · Not supported
Reasons to consider GeForce MX250
- More graphics memory
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1 · NVIDIA Image Scaling (NIS)
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3131
100100
5454
4356
Graphics card ranking
Positions 146–151of 411
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce 840M
106 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
31
31
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
29
29
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
26
26
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100
100
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
43
43
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
HDMI
DisplayPort
USB Type-C
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Architecture
Memory type
Max resolution
Max monitors
Recommended PSU
Length
Compute API
Launch price——
Shader units / cores
Interface
Power connector
Thickness
Die sizeBetter
Memory cache
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAM
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory bus
Memory bandwidthBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Transistor countBetter
Device class
Release date
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GeForce 840M and GeForce MX250 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
GeForce 840MGeForce MX250
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
154 FPS
157 FPS
1080p Ultra
108 FPS
110 FPS
1440p Ultra
58 FPS
59 FPS
4K Ultra
21 FPS
21 FPS
Counter-Strike 2GeForce 840M154 FPSGeForce MX250157 FPSGeForce 840M108 FPSGeForce MX250110 FPSGeForce 840M58 FPSGeForce MX25059 FPSGeForce 840M21 FPSGeForce MX25021 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077GeForce 840M100 FPSGeForce MX250101 FPSGeForce 840M86 FPSGeForce MX25087 FPSGeForce 840M42 FPSGeForce MX25043 FPSGeForce 840M14 FPSGeForce MX25014 FPS
Forza Horizon 5GeForce 840M126 FPSGeForce MX250128 FPSGeForce 840M81 FPSGeForce MX25083 FPSGeForce 840M52 FPSGeForce MX25053 FPSGeForce 840M31 FPSGeForce MX25031 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyGeForce 840M81 FPSGeForce MX25083 FPSGeForce 840M68 FPSGeForce MX25069 FPSGeForce 840M38 FPSGeForce MX25038 FPSGeForce 840M14 FPSGeForce MX25015 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 10031310%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100343811%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100343811%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100435626%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001001000%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100364215%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100364113%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100343811%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100384517%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10035388%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX11.012.1
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingNot supportedNVIDIA Image Scaling (NIS)
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 5.0OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureKepler / MaxwellPascal / Turing / Ampere
Process node28 nm14 nmBetter
Release date20142019
Device classMobileMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count1020 million1800 millionBetter
Die size77 mm²74 mm²Better
Shader units / cores384384
Base clock1029 MHz1519 MHzBetter
Boost clock1124 MHz1582 MHzBetter
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x4
LengthOEM dependentOEM dependent
ThicknessIGPIGP
Recommended PSUOEM dependentOEM dependent
Power connectorNoneNone
Display outputs and limits
HDMIOEM dependentOEM dependent
DisplayPortOEM dependentOEM dependent
USB Type-COEM dependentOEM dependent
Max monitorsOEM dependentOEM dependent
Max resolutionDepends on host systemDepends on host system
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM2 GB DDR32 GB GDDR5
Memory typeGDDR5 / DDR3GDDR5 / GDDR6
Memory bus64 bit64 bit
TFLOPS0.8631.215Better
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 68
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (2)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (2)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GeForce 840M or GeForce MX250?+
GeForce 840M has the higher overall gaming score, while GeForce 840M offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GeForce 840M is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GeForce 840M is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GeForce 840M offers more overall performance, while GeForce 840M offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GeForce 840M is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GeForce 840M is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GeForce 840M leads in combined 1440p performance. GeForce 840M can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GeForce 840M is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GeForce MX250 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GeForce MX250 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to GeForce 840M if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.