Radeon RX Vega 9 vs GeForce GTS 250

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTS 250 with Radeon RX Vega 9, including specs and performance data.

GTS 250
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 150 Watt
1.54

RX Vega 9 outperforms GTS 250 by a whopping 263% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking973608
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.08no data
Power efficiency0.7125.65
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code nameG92BVega Raven Ridge
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date4 March 2009 (15 years ago)26 October 2017 (7 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 cores128576
Core clock speed738 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1300 MHz
Number of transistors754 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt15 Watt
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
Shared memory--

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_1
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.0no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA+-

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 HD5−6
−320%
21
+320%

Cost per frame, $

1080p39.80no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Elden Ring 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Elden Ring 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 38
+0%
38
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
World of Tanks 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Elden Ring 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
World of Tanks 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how GTS 250 and RX Vega 9 compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega 9 is 320% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.54 5.59
Recency 4 March 2009 26 October 2017
Chip lithography 55 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 15 Watt

RX Vega 9 has a 263% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 900% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 9 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 250 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTS 250 is a desktop card while Radeon RX Vega 9 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 RX Vega 9
Radeon RX Vega 9

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.


3.5 1681 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 23 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 9 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.