Radeon R7 250X vs GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 and Radeon R7 250X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
GTX 780 Rev. 2 outperforms R7 250X by an impressive 80% 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 | 472 | 636 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.09 | 0.63 |
| Power efficiency | 2.96 | 5.15 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
| GPU code name | GK110B | Cape Verde |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Design | no data | reference |
| Release date | 10 September 2013 (11 years ago) | 13 February 2014 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $649 | $99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
GTX 780 Rev. 2 has 73% better value for money than R7 250X.
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 | 2304 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 863 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 902 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 7,080 million | 1,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 80 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 173.2 | 38.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.156 TFLOPS | 1.216 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 48 | 16 |
| TMUs | 192 | 40 |
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 | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 210 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 1 x 6-pin |
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 | 3 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1502 MHz | 1625 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 288.4 GB/s | 96 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 | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
| Eyefinity | - | + |
| HDMI | + | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| CrossFire | - | + |
| FreeSync | - | + |
| DDMA audio | no data | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | DirectX® 12 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | - |
| CUDA | 3.5 | - |
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 | 9.73 | 5.41 |
| Recency | 10 September 2013 | 13 February 2014 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | 2 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 80 Watt |
GTX 780 Rev. 2 has a 79.9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.
R7 250X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 months, and 212.5% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 250X in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
