Radeon HD 8250 vs HD 6320

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in performance rankingnot rated1172
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureTerascale 2 (2009−2015)GCN (2011−2017)
GPU code nameZacateTemash
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date16 November 2010 (13 years ago)1 June 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$554.99 no data
Current price$115 (0.2x MSRP)$501

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores80128
Core clock speed500 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed600 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistors450 million1,178 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt8 Watt
Texture fill rate4.8003.200

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon HD 6320 and Radeon HD 8250 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

InterfaceIGPIGP

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 typeSystem SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.06.3
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.22.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

HD 6320 147
HD 8250 217
+47.6%

HD 8250 outperforms HD 6320 by 48% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

HD 6320 892
HD 8250 1317
+47.7%

HD 8250 outperforms HD 6320 by 48% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

HD 6320 302
HD 8250 423
+39.9%

HD 8250 outperforms HD 6320 by 40% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 16 November 2010 1 June 2013
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 8 Watt

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 6320 and Radeon HD 8250. We've got no test results to judge.


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 6320
Radeon HD 6320
AMD Radeon HD 8250
Radeon HD 8250

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.


3 161 vote

Rate Radeon HD 6320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 12 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8250 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.