Radeon R7 250E vs GeForce GTX 760A
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 760A with Radeon R7 250E, including specs and performance data.
R7 250E outperforms 760A by an impressive 56% 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 | 870 | 742 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 1.10 |
| Power efficiency | 3.58 | 5.60 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
| GPU code name | GK106 | Cape Verde |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 17 March 2014 (11 years ago) | 20 December 2013 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $109 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 | 768 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 628 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 657 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,540 million | 1,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 55 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 42.05 | 25.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.009 TFLOPS | 0.8192 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 64 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 168 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 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 | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1002 MHz | 1125 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 64.13 GB/s | 72 GB/s |
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 Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
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 | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | 3.0 | - |
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 | 2.56 | 4.00 |
| Recency | 17 March 2014 | 20 December 2013 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
GTX 760A has an age advantage of 2 months, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
R7 250E, on the other hand, has a 56.3% higher aggregate performance score.
The Radeon R7 250E is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 760A in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 760A is a notebook graphics card while Radeon R7 250E is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
