AMD Radeon R7 250X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R7 250X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, Geekbench - OpenCL.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 250X
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- Around 25% higher pipelines: 640 vs 512
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 3.1x lower typical power consumption: 80 Watt vs 244 Watt
- Around 33% higher maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1536 MB
- Around 30% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 637 vs 490
- Around 61% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 51.987 vs 32.378
- Around 15% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 151.963 vs 132.363
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 13 February 2014 vs 9 November 2010 |
| Pipelines | 640 vs 512 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 80 Watt vs 244 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 1536 MB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 637 vs 490 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.987 vs 32.378 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.963 vs 132.363 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3357 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580
- Around 30% higher texture fill rate: 49.4 billion / sec vs 38 GTexel / s
- Around 30% better floating-point performance: 1,581.1 gflops vs 1,216 gflops
- Around 23% higher memory clock speed: 2004 MHz (4008 data rate) vs 1625 MHz
- 2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4630 vs 2269
- Around 24% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 40.048 vs 32.22
- Around 37% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 872.651 vs 638.532
- Around 46% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.338 vs 2.963
- Around 52% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5953 vs 3916
- Around 52% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5953 vs 3916
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 49.4 billion / sec vs 38 GTexel / s |
| Floating-point performance | 1,581.1 gflops vs 1,216 gflops |
| Memory clock speed | 2004 MHz (4008 data rate) vs 1625 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4630 vs 2269 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 40.048 vs 32.22 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 872.651 vs 638.532 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.338 vs 2.963 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5953 vs 3916 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 vs 3716 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5953 vs 3916 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 vs 3716 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 250X
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R7 250X | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2269 | 4630 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 637 | 490 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 32.22 | 40.048 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 638.532 | 872.651 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.963 | 4.338 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.987 | 32.378 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.963 | 132.363 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3916 | 5953 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3716 | 3717 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3916 | 5953 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3716 | 3717 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3357 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 809 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 15182 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R7 250X | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi 2.0 |
| Code name | Cape Verde | GF110 |
| Design | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
| Launch date | 13 February 2014 | 9 November 2010 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $99 | $499 |
| Place in performance rating | 659 | 620 |
| Price now | $260.70 | $289.88 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 11.25 | 19.21 |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | |
| Floating-point performance | 1,216 gflops | 1,581.1 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 512 |
| Stream Processors | 640 | |
| Texture fill rate | 38 GTexel / s | 49.4 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 80 Watt | 244 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,500 million | 3,000 million |
| Core clock speed | 1544 MHz | |
| CUDA cores | 512 | |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 97 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort | Mini HDMITwo Dual Link DVI, 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| Dual-link DVI support | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 210 mm | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1 x 6-pin | One 6-pin and One 8-pin |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
| SLI options | 3-way | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.2 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1536 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | 192.4 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1625 MHz | 2004 MHz (4008 data rate) |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DSR | ||
| SLI | ||
| Surround | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon R7 250X with others
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDRadeon HD 6970
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
IntelIris Pro Graphics 5200
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDFirePro D300
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDRadeon R9 M280X
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDFirePro W6150M
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
