R7 250 vs RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
4.48
+61.2%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms R7 250 by 61% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking617758
Place by popularity36not in top-100
Value for moneyno data0.10
ArchitectureVega (2017−2021)GCN (2011−2017)
GPU code nameVega Raven RidgeOland XT
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date26 October 2017 (6 years old)1 October 2013 (10 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$89
Current priceno data$256 (2.9x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Technical specs

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 cores512384
Boost clock speed1200 MHz1050 MHz
Number of transistorsno data950 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data25.20
Floating-point performanceno data716.8 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and Radeon R7 250 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.

Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x8
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataN/A

Memory

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 typeno dataDDR3, GDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1150 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data72 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 data1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMIno data+
DisplayPort supportno data-

Technologies

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

AppAccelerationno data+
CrossFireno data1
Endurono data-
FreeSyncno data1
HD3Dno data-
PowerTuneno data-
TrueAudiono data-
ZeroCoreno data-
DDMA audiono data+

API support

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

DirectX12_1DirectX® 12
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Mantleno 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.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 4.48
+61.2%
R7 250 2.78

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms R7 250 by 61% in our combined benchmark results.


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%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 10294
R7 250 12581
+22.2%

R7 250 outperforms RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) by 22% 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%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 3557
+28.2%
R7 250 2775

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms R7 250 by 28% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 2381
+11%
R7 250 2145

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms R7 250 by 11% 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%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 15770
+4.6%
R7 250 15080

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms R7 250 by 5% 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%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 27
R7 250 27
+0.4%

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 HD18
−5.6%
19
+5.6%
4K10
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 9
+50%
6−7
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 15
+275%
4−5
−275%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Battlefield 5 24
+300%
6−7
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+50%
6−7
−50%
Far Cry 5 12
+200%
4−5
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 13
+225%
4−5
−225%
Forza Horizon 4 26
+271%
7−8
−271%
Hitman 3 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12
+200%
4−5
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12
+100%
6−7
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12
+1100%
1−2
−1100%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 11
+175%
4−5
−175%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Battlefield 5 22
+267%
6−7
−267%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6
−100%
12−14
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 10
+150%
4−5
−150%
Far Cry New Dawn 14
+250%
4−5
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+329%
7−8
−329%
Hitman 3 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Metro Exodus 7
+75%
4−5
−75%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8
+100%
4−5
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Battlefield 5 23
+283%
6−7
−283%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
−20%
6−7
+20%
Far Cry 5 9
+125%
4−5
−125%
Far Cry New Dawn 14
+250%
4−5
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 23
+229%
7−8
−229%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3
+200%
1−2
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4
+300%
1−2
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Battlefield 5 6
+100%
3−4
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 9
+80%
5−6
−80%

This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and R7 250 compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • R7 250 is 5.6% faster than RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

4K resolution:

  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 66.7% faster than R7 250

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 1100% faster than the R7 250.
  • in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R7 250 is 100% faster than the RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000).

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is ahead in 48 tests (91%)
  • R7 250 is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (6%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 4.48 2.78
Recency 26 October 2017 1 October 2013
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 75 Watt

The Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 250 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a notebook card while Radeon R7 250 is a desktop one.


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

User ratings

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


AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
AMD Radeon R7 250
Radeon R7 250

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User ratings: view and submit

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


3.5 1057 votes

Rate AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 400 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

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