Radeon HD 6750 vs R7 265

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 265 and Radeon HD 6750, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 265
2014, $149
4 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
9.68
+290%

R7 265 outperforms HD 6750 by a whopping 290% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking493878
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.700.15
Power efficiency4.962.22
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code namePitcairnJuniper
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferencereference
Release date13 February 2014 (11 years ago)21 January 2011 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 $49.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

R7 265 has 3033% better value for money than HD 6750.

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores1024720
Boost clock speed925 MHz900 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million1,040 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt86 Watt
Texture fill rate59.2025.20
Floating-point processing power1.894 TFLOPS1.008 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs6436
L1 Cache256 KB72 KB
L2 Cache512 KB256 KB

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 2.0 x16
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length210 mm170 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin1x 6-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz1050 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s73.6 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort
Eyefinity++
HDMI++

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire++
FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 11
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.21.2

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R7 265 9.68
+290%
HD 6750 2.48

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.

R7 265 5220
+314%
HD 6750 1260

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.68 2.48
Recency 13 February 2014 21 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 86 Watt

R7 265 has a 290.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

HD 6750, on the other hand, has 74.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 265 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6750 in performance tests.

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 265
Radeon R7 265
AMD Radeon HD 6750
Radeon HD 6750

Other comparisons

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.


3.2 385 votes

Rate Radeon R7 265 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 299 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 265 or Radeon HD 6750, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.