Radeon HD 6250 IGP vs GeForce GTX 280

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking734not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.13no data
Power efficiency1.00no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGT200Loveland
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date16 June 2008 (16 years ago)9 November 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 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 cores24080
Core clock speed602 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million450 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)236 Watt9 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate48.163.200
Floating-point processing power0.6221 TFLOPS0.064 TFLOPS
ROPs324
TMUs808

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 x16IGP
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width512 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1107 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth141.7 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 ConnectorsHDTVDual Link DVINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
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)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.0
OpenGL2.14.4
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 16 June 2008 9 November 2010
Chip lithography 65 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 236 Watt 9 Watt

HD 6250 IGP has an age advantage of 2 years, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 2522.2% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 280 and Radeon HD 6250 IGP. We've got no test results to judge.


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 GTX 280
GeForce GTX 280
AMD Radeon HD 6250 IGP
Radeon HD 6250 IGP

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.


3.6 105 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Radeon HD 6250 IGP 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.