Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile vs Radeon HD 6250

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6250 with RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

HD 6250
2011
512 MB GDDR3, 19 Watt
0.24
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
2024
4 GB GDDR6, 35 Watt
27.27
+11263%

Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms HD 6250 by a whopping 11263% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1361200
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.8854.33
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameCedarAD107
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date31 January 2011 (13 years ago)26 February 2024 (less than a year 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 cores802048
Core clock speed650 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2025 MHz
Number of transistors292 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)19 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate5.200129.6
Floating-point processing power0.104 TFLOPS8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs864
Tensor Coresno data64
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth8 GB/s128.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMIPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.8
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.23.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.9

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

HD 6250 0.24
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 27.27
+11263%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD 6250 172
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 20239
+11667%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

HD 6250 422
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 66297
+15610%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD6
−10733%
650−700
+10733%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−10900%
220−230
+10900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−9900%
300−310
+9900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−10900%
220−230
+10900%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−10900%
220−230
+10900%
Hitman 3 4−5
−11150%
450−500
+11150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−11150%
900−950
+11150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−11150%
450−500
+11150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−11150%
3150−3200
+11150%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−9900%
300−310
+9900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−10900%
220−230
+10900%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−10900%
220−230
+10900%
Hitman 3 4−5
−11150%
450−500
+11150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−11150%
900−950
+11150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−11150%
450−500
+11150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−11011%
1000−1050
+11011%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−11150%
3150−3200
+11150%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−9900%
300−310
+9900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−10900%
220−230
+10900%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−10900%
220−230
+10900%
Hitman 3 4−5
−11150%
450−500
+11150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−11150%
900−950
+11150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−11150%
450−500
+11150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−11011%
1000−1050
+11011%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−11150%
3150−3200
+11150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
−10733%
650−700
+10733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−10900%
220−230
+10900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−10900%
220−230
+10900%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−10900%
110−120
+10900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−10900%
220−230
+10900%

This is how HD 6250 and Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is 10733% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.24 27.27
Recency 31 January 2011 26 February 2024
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 19 Watt 35 Watt

HD 6250 has 84.2% lower power consumption.

Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has a 11262.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6250 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6250 is a desktop card while RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon HD 6250
Radeon HD 6250
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 78 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 17 votes

Rate RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.