Intel UHD Graphics 730 vs AMD Radeon R7 250X
Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 730 and AMD Radeon R7 250X 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, Geekbench - OpenCL, 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, 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel UHD Graphics 730
- Videocard is newer: launch date 10 year(s) 8 month(s) later
- Around 30% higher boost clock speed: 1300 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- 410.5x more texture fill rate: 15.60 GTexel/s vs 38 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 5.3x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 80 Watt
- Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 5221 vs 3716
- Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 5221 vs 3716
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 2021 vs 13 February 2014 |
Boost clock speed | 1300 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 15.60 GTexel/s vs 38 GTexel / s |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 80 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 5221 vs 3716 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 5221 vs 3716 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 250X
- 3.3x more pipelines: 640 vs 192
- Around 43% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2269 vs 1582
- Around 61% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 637 vs 395
- Around 61% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3916 vs 2429
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3309
- Around 61% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3916 vs 2429
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3309
Specifications (specs) | |
Pipelines | 640 vs 192 |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2269 vs 1582 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 637 vs 395 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3916 vs 2429 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3309 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3916 vs 2429 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3309 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 730
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 250X
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
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 | Intel UHD Graphics 730 | AMD Radeon R7 250X |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1582 | 2269 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 395 | 637 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5967 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2429 | 3916 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 5221 | 3716 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3309 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2429 | 3916 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 5221 | 3716 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3309 | 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 603 | 0 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 32.22 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 638.532 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.963 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.987 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.963 |
Compare specifications (specs)
Intel UHD Graphics 730 | AMD Radeon R7 250X | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Generation 12.1 | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | Rocket Lake GT1 | Cape Verde |
Launch date | 2021 | 13 February 2014 |
Place in performance rating | 661 | 664 |
Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Design | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
Launch price (MSRP) | $99 | |
Price now | $260.70 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 11.25 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1300 MHz | 1000 MHz |
Compute units | 24 | |
Core clock speed | 300 MHz | |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 124.8 GFLOPS (1:4) | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 998.4 GFLOPS (2:1) | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 499.2 GFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 192 | 640 |
Pixel fill rate | 10.40 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 15.60 GTexel/s | 38 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 80 Watt |
Floating-point performance | 1,216 gflops | |
Stream Processors | 640 | |
Transistor count | 1,500 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
Eyefinity | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
Length | 210 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1 x 6-pin | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
OpenCL | 3.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Memory bus width | 64 / 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Shared memory | 1 | |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | |
Memory clock speed | 1625 MHz | |
Memory type | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync |