ATI Radeon 7500 vs ATI HD 4250
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 4250 and Radeon 7500, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
HD 4250 outperforms 7500 by a whopping 2800% 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 | 1397 | 1597 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 0.89 | 0.03 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Rage 7 (2001−2006) |
| GPU code name | RV620 | RV200 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 25 February 2009 (17 years ago) | 14 August 2001 (24 years ago) |
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 | 40 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 594 MHz | 290 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 181 million | 60 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 150 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 23 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 2.376 | 1.740 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.04752 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 2 |
| TMUs | 4 | 6 |
| L2 Cache | 64 KB | no 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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | AGP 4x |
| Width | 1-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 | DDR2 | DDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 64 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 396 MHz | 230 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 6.336 GB/s | 7.36 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | no data |
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 | 1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video | 1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 7.0 |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenCL | N/A | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 24−27 | 0−1 |
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 24−27 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 24−27 | 0−1 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.29 | 0.01 |
| Recency | 25 February 2009 | 14 August 2001 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 64 MB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 150 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 23 Watt |
ATI HD 4250 has a 2800% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 172.7% more advanced lithography process.
ATI 7500, on the other hand, has 8.7% lower power consumption.
The Radeon HD 4250 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 7500 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.
