NVIDIA
GeForce MX250 vs GeForce GTX 680
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GTX 680
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce MX250 and GTX 680 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗GTX 680 outperforms GeForce MX250 by ~13% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+13%
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
Higher catalog score: GeForce MX250 (~8%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider GeForce MX250
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1 · NVIDIA Image Scaling (NIS)
Reasons to consider GTX 680
- Higher catalog performance index
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 3.0 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3135
10060
5469
5656
Graphics card ranking
Positions 146–151of 411
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce GTX 680
104 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
35Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
29
32Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
26
29Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
60
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
43Better
40
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Release date
HDMI
DisplayPort
Max resolution
Max monitors
USB Type-C
Recommended PSU
Length
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Architecture
Memory type
Compute API
Launch price—
Shader units / coresBetter
Interface
Power connector
Thickness
Die sizeBetter
Memory cache
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAM
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Transistor countBetter
Device class
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GeForce MX250 and GTX 680 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 MX250GTX 680
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
157 FPS
178 FPS
1080p Ultra
110 FPS
122 FPS
1440p Ultra
59 FPS
67 FPS
4K Ultra
21 FPS
24 FPS
Counter-Strike 2GeForce MX250157 FPSGTX 680178 FPSGeForce MX250110 FPSGTX 680122 FPSGeForce MX25059 FPSGTX 68067 FPSGeForce MX25021 FPSGTX 68024 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077GeForce MX250101 FPSGTX 680115 FPSGeForce MX25087 FPSGTX 68096 FPSGeForce MX25043 FPSGTX 68048 FPSGeForce MX25014 FPSGTX 68016 FPS
Forza Horizon 5GeForce MX250128 FPSGTX 680145 FPSGeForce MX25083 FPSGTX 68091 FPSGeForce MX25053 FPSGTX 68060 FPSGeForce MX25031 FPSGTX 68035 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyGeForce MX25083 FPSGTX 68094 FPSGeForce MX25069 FPSGTX 68076 FPSGeForce MX25038 FPSGTX 68043 FPSGeForce MX25015 FPSGTX 68016 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100313512%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 10038380%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 10038418%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 10056560%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001006050%
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 / 10042445%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 10041435%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 10038418%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10045462%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10038418%
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
DirectX12.111.0
Vulkan1.41.2
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingNVIDIA Image Scaling (NIS)Not supported
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 3.0
Architecture and release
ArchitecturePascal / Turing / AmpereKepler
Process node14 nmBetter28 nm
Release date20192012
Device classMobileDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count1800 million3540 millionBetter
Die size74 mm²Better294 mm²
Shader units / cores3841536Better
Base clock1519 MHzBetter1006 MHz
Boost clock1582 MHzBetter1058 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x4PCIe 3x16
LengthOEM dependent256 mm
ThicknessIGPDual-slot
Recommended PSUOEM dependent450 W
Power connectorNone6+6 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMIOEM dependentHDMI 1.4a
DisplayPortOEM dependentDisplayPort 1.2
USB Type-COEM dependentNo
Max monitorsOEM dependent4
Max resolutionDepends on host system4096 × 2160
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM2 GB GDDR52 GB GDDR5
Memory typeGDDR5 / GDDR6GDDR5
Memory bus64 bit256 bitBetter
TFLOPS1.2153.25Better
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 / 69
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 (3)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (4)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record changed: product_prices
- · 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 MX250 or GTX 680?+
GeForce MX250 has the higher overall gaming score, while GTX 680 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GeForce MX250 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 MX250 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 MX250 offers more overall performance, while GeForce MX250 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GeForce MX250 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GTX 680 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GeForce MX250 leads in combined 1440p performance. GeForce MX250 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GeForce MX250 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 MX250 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.