FirePro W4100 vs Radeon R7 250

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

R7 250
2013
2048 MB DDR3, GDDR5
2.77

FirePro W4100 outperforms Radeon R7 250 by 43% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary Details

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

Place in performance ranking760655
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation0.100.17
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)GCN (2011−2017)
GPU code nameOland XTCape Verde
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date1 October 2013 (10 years ago)2 October 2015 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$89 no data
Current price$256 (2.9x MSRP)$916

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

FirePro W4100 has 70% better value for money than R7 250.

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 cores384512
Core clock speedno data630 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHzno data
Number of transistors950 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate25.2020.16
Floating-point performance716.8 gflops645.1 gflops

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 supportPCIe 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Length168 mm171 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Form factorno datalow profile / half length
Supplementary power connectorsN/ANone

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 typeDDR3, GDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1150 MHz4000 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s72 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 HDMI, 1x VGA4x mini-DisplayPort
HDMI+no data
DisplayPort support-no data
Dual-link DVI supportno data1

Supported GPU Technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration++
CrossFire1no data
Enduro-no data
FreeSync1no data
HD3D-no data
PowerTune-no data
TrueAudio-no data
ZeroCore-no data
DDMA audio+no data

API Compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkanno data1.2.131
Mantle-no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

R7 250 2.77
FirePro W4100 3.95
+42.6%

FirePro W4100 outperforms Radeon R7 250 by 43% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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%

R7 250 1072
FirePro W4100 1528
+42.5%

FirePro W4100 outperforms Radeon R7 250 by 43% in Passmark.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R7 250 2145
+28.8%
FirePro W4100 1665

Radeon R7 250 outperforms FirePro W4100 by 29% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R7 250 15080
+19.1%
FirePro W4100 12657

Radeon R7 250 outperforms FirePro W4100 by 19% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

R7 250 27
+36.3%
FirePro W4100 20

Radeon R7 250 outperforms FirePro W4100 by 36% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.

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 HD19
+18.8%
16
−18.8%
4K2−3
−50%
3
+50%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−83.3%
10−12
+83.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−71.4%
12−14
+71.4%
Hitman 3 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−83.3%
10−12
+83.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−71.4%
12−14
+71.4%
Hitman 3 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−83.3%
10−12
+83.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−71.4%
12−14
+71.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 2−3
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

This is how R7 250 and FirePro W4100 compete in popular games:

  • R7 250 is 18.8% faster than FirePro W4100 in 1080p
  • FirePro W4100 is 50% faster than R7 250 in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the FirePro W4100 is 300% faster than the R7 250.

All in all, in popular games:

  • FirePro W4100 is ahead in 49 tests (92%)
  • there's a draw in 4 tests (8%)

Pros & Cons Summary


Performance score 2.77 3.95
Recency 1 October 2013 2 October 2015
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 50 Watt

The FirePro W4100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 250 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 250 is a desktop card while FirePro W4100 is a 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 R7 250
Radeon R7 250
AMD FirePro W4100
FirePro W4100

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 rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 408 votes

Rate Radeon R7 250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 71 vote

Rate FirePro W4100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & Сomments

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