Radeon R7 250E vs GeForce GTX 650
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 650 and Radeon R7 250E, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
GTX 650 outperforms R7 250E by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 699 | 706 |
| Place by popularity | 74 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.07 | 1.04 |
| Power efficiency | 4.85 | 5.65 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
| GPU code name | GK107 | Cape Verde |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 6 September 2012 (12 years ago) | 20 December 2013 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $109 | $109 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
GTX 650 has 3% better value for money than R7 250E.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 cores | 384 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 1058 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,270 million | 1,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 64 Watt | 55 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 33.86 | 25.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.8125 TFLOPS | 0.8192 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 32 | 32 |
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 support | PCI Express 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 147 mm | 168 mm |
| Height | 4.38" (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |
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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128-bit GDDR5 | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5.0 GB/s | 1125 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 80.0 GB/s | 72 GB/s |
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 Connectors | One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One Mini HDMI | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Multi monitor support | 4 displays | no data |
| HDMI | + | + |
| HDCP | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| 3D Blu-Ray | + | - |
| 3D Gaming | + | - |
| 3D Vision | + | - |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | + | - |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.16 | 4.10 |
| Recency | 6 September 2012 | 20 December 2013 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 64 Watt | 55 Watt |
GTX 650 has a 1.5% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
R7 250E, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 16.4% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 650 and Radeon R7 250E.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
