Join Us On Facebook

Compare any two graphics cards:
VS

Radeon HD 7750 vs Radeon R7 250

Intro

The Radeon HD 7750 features a clock speed of 800 MHz and a GDDR5 memory speed of 1125 MHz. It also uses a 128-bit memory bus, and uses a 28 nm design. It is comprised of 512 SPUs, 32 Texture Address Units, and 16 ROPs.

Compare those specifications to the Radeon R7 250, which has GPU core speed of 1000 MHz, and 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory running at 1150 MHz through a 128-bit bus. It also is comprised of 384 SPUs, 24 Texture Address Units, and 8 ROPs.

(No game benchmarks for this combination yet.)

Power Usage and Theoretical Benchmarks

Power Consumption (Max TDP)

Radeon HD 7750 55 Watts
Radeon R7 250 65 Watts
Difference: 10 Watts (18%)

Memory Bandwidth

Theoretically, the Radeon R7 250 should be a little bit faster than the Radeon HD 7750 in general. (explain)

Radeon R7 250 73600 MB/sec
Radeon HD 7750 72000 MB/sec
Difference: 1600 (2%)

Texel Rate

The Radeon HD 7750 will be a small bit (more or less 7%) better at texture filtering than the Radeon R7 250. (explain)

Radeon HD 7750 25600 Mtexels/sec
Radeon R7 250 24000 Mtexels/sec
Difference: 1600 (7%)

Pixel Rate

If using a high screen resolution is important to you, then the Radeon HD 7750 is the winner, by far. (explain)

Radeon HD 7750 12800 Mpixels/sec
Radeon R7 250 8000 Mpixels/sec
Difference: 4800 (60%)

Please note that the above 'benchmarks' are all just theoretical - the results were calculated based on the card's specifications, and real-world performance may (and probably will) vary at least a bit.

Price Comparison

Please note that the price comparisons are based on search keywords, and might not be the exact same card listed on this page. We have no control over the accuracy of their search results.

Radeon HD 7750

Amazon.com

Other US-based stores

Radeon R7 250

Amazon.com

Other US-based stores

Specifications

Model Radeon HD 7750 Radeon R7 250
Manufacturer ATi ATi
Year February 2012 October 2013
Code Name Cape Verde Pro Oland XT
Fab Process 28 nm 28 nm
Bus PCIe 3.0 x16 PCIe 3.0 x16
Memory 1024 MB 1024 MB
Core Speed 800 MHz 1000 MHz
Shader Speed N/A MHz (N/A) MHz
Memory Speed 1125 MHz (4500 MHz effective) 1150 MHz (4600 MHz effective)
Unified Shaders 512 384
Texture Mapping Units 32 24
Render Output Units 16 8
Bus Type GDDR5 GDDR5
Bus Width 128-bit 128-bit
DirectX Version DirectX 11.1 DirectX 11.2
OpenGL Version OpenGL 4.2 OpenGL 4.3
Power (Max TDP) 55 watts 65 watts
Shader Model 5.0 5.0
Bandwidth 72000 MB/sec 73600 MB/sec
Texel Rate 25600 Mtexels/sec 24000 Mtexels/sec
Pixel Rate 12800 Mpixels/sec 8000 Mpixels/sec

Memory Bandwidth: Bandwidth is the largest amount of information (counted in MB per second) that can be transferred over the external memory interface within a second. It's worked out by multiplying the interface width by the speed of its memory. If the card has DDR RAM, it should be multiplied by 2 again. If DDR5, multiply by ANOTHER 2x. The higher the card's memory bandwidth, the faster the card will be in general. It especially helps with AA, High Dynamic Range and higher screen resolutions.

Texel Rate: Texel rate is the maximum amount of texture map elements (texels) that can be processed in one second. This is worked out by multiplying the total amount of texture units by the core clock speed of the chip. The higher the texel rate, the better the video card will be at handling texture filtering (anisotropic filtering - AF). It is measured in millions of texels in one second.

Pixel Rate: Pixel rate is the maximum amount of pixels that the graphics card could possibly record to its local memory per second - measured in millions of pixels per second. The figure is worked out by multiplying the number of Raster Operations Pipelines by the the core speed of the card. ROPs (Raster Operations Pipelines - also called Render Output Units) are responsible for outputting the pixels (image) to the screen. The actual pixel rate also depends on lots of other factors, especially the memory bandwidth of the card - the lower the memory bandwidth is, the lower the potential to reach the max fill rate.

Comments

One Response to “Radeon HD 7750 vs Radeon R7 250”
G Hanson says:
R7 250 sucks. 7750 wins.....

Your email address will not be published.


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree