Radeon 8040S vs R7 250X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 250X with Radeon 8040S, including specs and performance data.

R7 250X
2014, $99
2 GB GDDR5, 80 Watt
5.41

8040S outperforms R7 250X by a whopping 366% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking679264
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.63no data
Power efficiency5.2735.78
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)RDNA 3.5 (2025−2026)
GPU code nameCape VerdeStrix Halo
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 February 2014 (12 years ago)6 January 2025 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores6401024
Core clock speedno data1295 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz2800 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate38.00179.2
Floating-point processing power1.216 TFLOPSno data
ROPs1632
TMUs4064
Ray Tracing Coresno data16
L0 Cacheno data512 KB
L1 Cache160 KB512 KB
L2 Cache256 KB2 MB
L3 Cacheno data32 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 5.0 x16
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1625 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth96 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan-1.4

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

R7 250X 5.41
Radeon 8040S 25.23
+366%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R7 250X 2268
Samples: 2
Radeon 8040S 10578
+366%
Samples: 6

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R7 250X 2860
Radeon 8040S 12374
+333%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD7−8
−81.1%
37

Cost per frame, $

1080p14.14no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 140−150 140−150
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60 55−60
Hogwarts Legacy 50−55 50−55
Resident Evil 4 Remake 60−65 60−65

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 100−110 100−110
Counter-Strike 2 140−150 140−150
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60 55−60
Far Cry 5 80−85 80−85
Fortnite 120−130 120−130
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 100−110
Hogwarts Legacy 50−55 50−55
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110 100−110
Valorant 170−180 170−180

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 100−110 100−110
Counter-Strike 2 140−150 140−150
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 260−270 260−270
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60 55−60
Far Cry 5 80−85 80−85
Fortnite 120−130 120−130
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 100−110
Grand Theft Auto V 90−95 90−95
Hogwarts Legacy 50−55 50−55
Metro Exodus 55−60 55−60
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110 100−110
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75−80 75−80
Valorant 170−180 170−180

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−110 100−110
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60 55−60
Far Cry 5 80−85 80−85
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 100−110
Hogwarts Legacy 50−55 50−55
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110 100−110
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75−80 75−80

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 120−130 120−130

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 55−60 55−60
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190 180−190
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50 45−50
Metro Exodus 35−40 35−40
Valorant 200−210 200−210

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 70−75 70−75
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27 24−27
Far Cry 5 60−65 60−65
Forza Horizon 4 65−70 65−70
Hogwarts Legacy 27−30 27−30
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45 40−45

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 60−65 60−65

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27 24−27
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50 45−50
Metro Exodus 21−24 21−24
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40 35−40
Valorant 140−150 140−150

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45 40−45
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12 10−12
Far Cry 5 30−35 30−35
Forza Horizon 4 45−50 45−50
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18 16−18
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30 27−30

4K
Epic

Fortnite 27−30 27−30

This is how R7 250X and Radeon 8040S compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 8040S is 429% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.41 25.23
Recency 13 February 2014 6 January 2025
Chip lithography 28 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 55 Watt

Radeon 8040S has a 366% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 86% more advanced lithography process, and 31% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 8040S is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 250X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 250X is a desktop graphics card while Radeon 8040S is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 180 votes

Rate Radeon R7 250X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate Radeon 8040S on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 250X or Radeon 8040S, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.