Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile vs Radeon R7 250E

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 250E with Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

R7 250E
2013
1 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
4.29

RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms R7 250E by a whopping 511% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking639191
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.116.44
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code nameCape VerdeN19E-Q1
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date20 December 2013 (10 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109 no data
Current price$599 (5.5x MSRP)$2393

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 3000 Mobile has 5755% better value for money than R7 250E.

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 cores5121920
Core clock speed800 MHz945 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1380 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rate25.60198.7
Floating-point performance819.2 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon R7 250E and Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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.

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed4500 MHz14000 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s448.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+no data
G-SYNC supportno data+

Supported technologies

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

VR Readyno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDAno data7.5

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 250E 4.29
RTX 3000 Mobile 26.20
+511%

Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms Radeon R7 250E by 511% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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 250E 1970
RTX 3000 Mobile 14842
+653%

Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms Radeon R7 250E by 653% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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 HD14−16
−593%
97
+593%
4K14−16
−529%
88
+529%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−505%
260−270
+505%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 77
−484%
450−500
+484%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
−500%
270−280
+500%
Battlefield 5 85−90
−481%
500−550
+481%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
−466%
300−310
+466%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−505%
260−270
+505%
Far Cry 5 60−65
−483%
350−400
+483%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
−488%
400−450
+488%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
−480%
650−700
+480%
Hitman 3 50−55
−466%
300−310
+466%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
−477%
600−650
+477%
Metro Exodus 80−85
−495%
500−550
+495%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
−480%
400−450
+480%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95
−504%
550−600
+504%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
−448%
400−450
+448%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 62
−465%
350−400
+465%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
−500%
270−280
+500%
Battlefield 5 85−90
−481%
500−550
+481%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
−466%
300−310
+466%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−505%
260−270
+505%
Far Cry 5 60−65
−483%
350−400
+483%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
−488%
400−450
+488%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
−480%
650−700
+480%
Hitman 3 50−55
−466%
300−310
+466%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
−477%
600−650
+477%
Metro Exodus 43
−505%
260−270
+505%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
−480%
400−450
+480%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95
−504%
550−600
+504%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 109
−496%
650−700
+496%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
−448%
400−450
+448%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 39
−490%
230−240
+490%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
−500%
270−280
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
−466%
300−310
+466%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−505%
260−270
+505%
Far Cry 5 60−65
−483%
350−400
+483%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
−480%
650−700
+480%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
−477%
600−650
+477%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95
−504%
550−600
+504%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 56
−436%
300−310
+436%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
−448%
400−450
+448%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
−480%
400−450
+480%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
−500%
300−310
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60
−436%
300−310
+436%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
−493%
160−170
+493%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
−477%
150−160
+477%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
−483%
210−220
+483%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−488%
100−105
+488%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−500%
270−280
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−477%
300−310
+477%
Hitman 3 30−35
−481%
180−190
+481%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−456%
300−310
+456%
Metro Exodus 50−55
−500%
300−310
+500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
−503%
350−400
+503%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
−506%
200−210
+506%
Watch Dogs: Legion 20−22
−500%
120−130
+500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−491%
260−270
+491%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
−477%
150−160
+477%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
−471%
120−130
+471%
Hitman 3 21−24
−471%
120−130
+471%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33
−500%
180−190
+500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
−479%
110−120
+479%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−486%
170−180
+486%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
−494%
95−100
+494%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
−507%
85−90
+507%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
−500%
90−95
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−500%
90−95
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−483%
210−220
+483%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33
−500%
180−190
+500%
Metro Exodus 24−27
−500%
150−160
+500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
−483%
70−75
+483%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−509%
140−150
+509%

This is how R7 250E and RTX 3000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 593% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 529% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.29 26.20
Recency 20 December 2013 27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 80 Watt

The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 250E in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 250E is a desktop card while Quadro RTX 3000 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 R7 250E
Radeon R7 250E
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile
Quadro RTX 3000 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.


4 22 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 248 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 3000 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.