Radeon HD 6510G2 vs ATI HD 4250
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 4250 with Radeon HD 6510G2, including specs and performance data.
HD 6510G2 outperforms HD 4250 by a whopping 310% 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 | 1103 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 0.89 | no data |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | RV620 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 25 February 2009 (17 years ago) | 14 June 2011 (14 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 | 400 |
| Core clock speed | 594 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 181 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 2.376 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.04752 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | no data |
| TMUs | 4 | no data |
| 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).
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
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 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 396 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 6.336 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | + | - |
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 | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 11 |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | no data |
| OpenCL | N/A | no data |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
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
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−26.9%
|
30−35
+26.9%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
−115%
|
27−30
+115%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Dota 2 | 9−10
−77.8%
|
16−18
+77.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−26.9%
|
30−35
+26.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Dota 2 | 9−10
−77.8%
|
16−18
+77.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−26.9%
|
30−35
+26.9%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 0−1 | 8−9 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−500%
|
6−7
+500%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Valorant | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the HD 6510G2 is 500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD 6510G2 performs better in 24 tests (57%)
- there's a draw in 18 tests (43%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.29 | 1.19 |
| Recency | 25 February 2009 | 14 June 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 40 nm |
HD 6510G2 has a 310% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 38% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon HD 6510G2 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4250 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 4250 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon HD 6510G2 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
