Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 9000) vs GeForce GTS 250

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking970not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.06no data
Power efficiency0.72no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)RDNA 3+
GPU code nameG92Bno data
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date4 March 2009 (15 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores128128
Core clock speed738 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data2200 MHz
Number of transistors754 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nmno data
Power consumption (TDP)150 Wattno data
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate44.93no data
Floating-point processing power0.3871 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs64no data

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length229 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount1 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1100 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth70.4 GB/sno data

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVIno data
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12_2
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.0no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


We couldn't decide between GeForce GTS 250 and Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 9000). We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTS 250 is a desktop card while Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 9000) is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
GeForce GTS 250
AMD Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 9000)
Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 9000)

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.5 1643 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 9000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.