Join Us On Facebook

Compare any two graphics cards:
VS

Radeon HD 7750 vs Radeon R7 250

Intro

The Radeon HD 7750 makes use of a 28 nm design. ATi has clocked the core speed at 800 MHz. The GDDR5 memory works at a frequency of 1125 MHz on this card. It features 512 SPUs along with 32 TAUs and 16 Rasterization Operator Units.

Compare those specifications to the Radeon R7 250, which features core clock speeds of 1000 MHz on the GPU, and 1150 MHz on the 1024 MB of GDDR5 RAM. It features 384 SPUs along with 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

The Radeon R7 250 should theoretically be just a 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 just a bit (approximately 7%) more effective at AF than the Radeon R7 250. (explain)

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

Pixel Rate

The Radeon HD 7750 is a lot (about 60%) better at FSAA than the Radeon R7 250, and capable of handling higher screen resolutions better. (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 maximum amount of information (in units of MB per second) that can be moved across the external memory interface in a second. It's calculated by multiplying the interface width by its memory speed. If it uses DDR type memory, it should be multiplied by 2 again. If DDR5, multiply by ANOTHER 2x. The better the memory bandwidth, the better the card will be in general. It especially helps with anti-aliasing, HDR and higher screen resolutions.

Texel Rate: Texel rate is the maximum number of texture map elements (texels) that are applied per second. This is worked out by multiplying the total texture units by the core speed of the chip. The better this number, the better the video card will be at handling texture filtering (anisotropic filtering - AF). It is measured in millions of texels processed in a second.

Pixel Rate: Pixel rate is the maximum number of pixels that the graphics chip could possibly write to the local memory in one second - measured in millions of pixels per second. The number is worked out by multiplying the amount of colour ROPs by the the card's clock speed. ROPs (Raster Operations Pipelines - also called Render Output Units) are responsible for drawing the pixels (image) on the screen. The actual pixel output rate also depends on quite a few other factors, most notably the memory bandwidth - the lower the memory bandwidth is, the lower the potential to get to the maximum 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