OVERALL

SPECS

VS AVERAGE

REVIEWS

ALTERNATIVES

AMD Radeon R7 250 Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price in UK: ~£95
Avg. price in US: ~$50
VRAM: 1 GB
Memory bus width: 128 bit
Thermal Design Power (TDP): 65 W

AMD Radeon R7 250 review. Compare 118 technical specifications and user reviews to see how it ranks among graphics cards and if it is worth buying.

3.5

Poor

3.1

Poor

6.8

Good

3.1
Gaming
Score components:
45.0%
1.0
Floating-point performance
25.0%
1.0
VRAM
20.0%
?
Ray tracing cores / units
10.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4.1
Video editing
Score components:
35.0%
7.0
AV1 encode
30.0%
1.0
VRAM
20.0%
1.0
Floating-point performance
15.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
2.4
1080p
Score components:
55.0%
1.0
Floating-point performance
25.0%
1.0
VRAM
10.0%
?
Ray tracing cores / units
10.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
2.4
1440p
Score components:
50.0%
1.0
Floating-point performance
30.0%
1.0
VRAM
15.0%
?
Ray tracing cores / units
5.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
2.7
4K
Score components:
40.0%
1.0
Floating-point performance
35.0%
1.0
VRAM
20.0%
?
Ray tracing cores / units
5.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version

Best prices in UK

Best rankings

Verdict

The AMD Radeon R7 250 is an entry-level graphics card launched in late 2013, based on the 28nm GCN 1.0 Oland XT architecture. It typically features 384 stream processors, a base core clock of 1000 MHz (boosting to 1050 MHz), and a 128-bit memory interface paired with 1GB or 2GB of GDDR5 or DDR3 VRAM. Its main advantages include low power consumption with a 65W TDP that requires no external power connectors, a compact form factor ideal for budget and small-form-factor builds, and support for DirectX 12 (feature level 11_1) and Mantle API. However, it is limited by its aging architecture, lack of AMD TrueAudio support, and performance bottlenecks in modern titles due to low VRAM capacity and bandwidth.

Technical Specifications of AMD Radeon R7 250

Overall score

3.5

Show more

Hide

Popularity

What it is: An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the graphics card.

When it matters: When you prefer a graphics card that has already been chosen and reviewed by many other users.

Performance

1.5

Show more

Hide

3DMark Time Spy benchmark score

What it is: Benchmark result from 3DMark Time Spy, a synthetic DirectX 12 test often used as a quick gaming-performance reference.

When it matters: When you need a fast rough performance sort before digging into game-specific reviews and frame-rate data.

Importance: LOW

?

3DMark Port Royal score

What it is: Benchmark result from 3DMark Port Royal, a synthetic test focused on ray tracing performance.

When it matters: When ray tracing matters in the games you actually play and you want one quick way to separate stronger and weaker RT cards.

Importance: LOW

N/A

PassMark (G3D) result

What it is: Overall GPU performance score in PassMark G3D benchmark

When it matters: When you need one broad score to sort cards into rough performance tiers.

Importance: LOW

?

PassMark (DirectCompute) result

What it is: PassMark score for DirectCompute performance tests

When it matters: When compute workloads matter alongside gaming performance.

Importance: LOW

?

Floating-point performance

What it is: Theoretical floating-point compute performance of the GPU.

When it matters: When rendering, AI, or heavy compute work needs strong single-precision throughput.

Importance: LOW

Show more

Memory

1.6

Show more

Hide

VRAM

What it is: Total video memory available on the graphics card

When it matters: When you play at high settings, use texture mods, or work with large creative projects.

Importance: HIGH

Memory type

What it is: Type of graphics memory used (GDDR6, HBM2e, etc.)

When it matters: When memory technology is part of the buying decision because it affects bandwidth class, power use, and product positioning.

Importance: LOW

?

GDDR version

What it is: Generation of GDDR memory used by the graphics card.

When it matters: When you want to separate older memory generations from newer ones before comparing bandwidth, power behavior, and market tier.

Importance: LOW

Memory bus width

What it is: Width of the memory interface bus in bits

When it matters: When you care about steadier performance at higher resolutions, heavier texture settings, or ray-traced workloads that stress memory traffic.

Importance: HIGH

Maximum memory bandwidth

What it is: Maximum data transfer rate between GPU and its memory

When it matters: When 4K gaming, ray tracing, or creator work can choke a slower memory subsystem.

Importance: HIGH

Show more

Platform & Features

4.9

Show more

Hide

PCI Express (PCIe) version

What it is: Version of PCI Express interface supported

When it matters: When you are pairing the card with an older motherboard and want to avoid leaving bandwidth or future compatibility on the table.

Importance: LOW

PCIe lanes

What it is: Number of PCI Express lanes used for communication

When it matters: When limited lane width could bottleneck the card in some systems.

Importance: LOW

?

DirectX version

What it is: Highest supported DirectX API version

When it matters: When you play newer Windows games that depend on the latest graphics features.

Importance: LOW

?

Vulkan version

What it is: Highest supported Vulkan API version

When it matters: When modern games, emulators, or creative apps lean on Vulkan support.

Importance: LOW

OpenGL version

What it is: Highest supported OpenGL API version

When it matters: When older games or pro apps still depend on OpenGL compatibility.

Importance: LOW

Show more

Connectivity & Media

4.6

Show more

Hide

Max displays supported

What it is: Total number of external displays supported simultaneously

When it matters: When you run a multi-monitor desk for sim racing, trading, or editing.

Importance: LOW

Max digital resolution

What it is: Maximum supported digital display resolution

When it matters: When you plan to drive 4K or 8K panels at their native resolution.

Importance: LOW

DisplayPort outputs

What it is: Number of DisplayPort video outputs

When it matters: When your setup needs several high-refresh monitors without adapters.

Importance: LOW

DisplayPort version

What it is: Version of DisplayPort standard supported

When it matters: When your monitor setup depends on newer DisplayPort features for higher refresh rates, higher resolution, or better cable flexibility.

Importance: LOW

DisplayPort link rates

What it is: Supported data link rates for DisplayPort connections

When it matters: When you are pushing high resolution and refresh rate over DisplayPort.

Importance: LOW

Show more

Power & Cooling

7.4

Show more

Hide

Thermal Design Power (TDP)

What it is: Typical power consumption under full load (TDP)

When it matters: When you need a realistic idea of power draw before choosing a PSU or case.

Importance: MEDIUM

Power consumption while under peak load

What it is: Peak power draw of the graphics card under maximum load.

When it matters: When transient-heavy gaming loads could stress your power supply.

Importance: LOW

Recommended PSU wattage

What it is: Recommended wattage of the system power supply

When it matters: When you are checking whether your current power supply is enough.

Importance: LOW

Board power limit

What it is: Maximum configurable power limit for the GPU board

When it matters: When you care about how far the card can be pushed through tuning or factory power settings.

Importance: LOW

?

PCIe power spec

What it is: PCIe power delivery specification followed

When it matters: When you are checking whether the slot and external cables match the card's intended power-delivery standard.

Importance: LOW

?

Show more

Design

8.9

Show more

Hide

Size

What it is: Physical size of the GPU card

When it matters: When you need the card to fit a compact case without blocking nearby hardware.

Importance: LOW

?

Length

What it is: Physical length of the GPU card

When it matters: When front radiators or drive cages leave only limited GPU clearance.

Importance: LOW

Height

What it is: Physical height of the GPU card

When it matters: When side panels, brackets, or tight case layouts reduce vertical clearance.

Importance: LOW

Slot width

What it is: Number of PCIe slots occupied by the card

When it matters: When you need room for another PCIe card or better airflow under the GPU.

Importance: LOW

Weight

What it is: Total weight of the graphics card

When it matters: When sag, bracket support, or shipping stress matters in your build.

Importance: LOW

?

Show more

AMD Radeon R7 250 vs the average graphics card

Why is AMD Radeon R7 250 better than the average graphics card?

Show more

Hide

69.8% lower TDP
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (65 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
What it is: Typical power consumption under full load (TDP)
When it matters: When you need a realistic idea of power draw before choosing a PSU or case.
Importance: MEDIUM
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (65 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.65 W vs 215 W
38.5% lower PSU requirement
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (400 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
What it is: Recommended wattage of the system power supply
When it matters: When you are checking whether your current power supply is enough.
Importance: LOW
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (400 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.400 W vs 650 W
117.37 mm shorter card length
AMD Radeon R7 250 is shorter than the average graphics card (168 mm vs 285.37 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285.37 mm.
What it is: Physical length of the GPU card
When it matters: When front radiators or drive cages leave only limited GPU clearance.
Importance: LOW
AMD Radeon R7 250 is shorter than the average graphics card (168 mm vs 285.37 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285.37 mm.168 mm vs 285.37 mm
8x larger L2 cache
AMD Radeon R7 250 has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (256 MB vs 32 MB). The average graphics card has 32 MB L2 cache.
What it is: Total size of the GPU’s L2 cache memory
When it matters: When cache size can help the GPU feed data faster in demanding scenes.
Importance: LOW
AMD Radeon R7 250 has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (256 MB vs 32 MB). The average graphics card has 32 MB L2 cache.256 MB vs 32 MB
16 mm lower card height
AMD Radeon R7 250 is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 127 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 127 mm.
What it is: Physical height of the GPU card
When it matters: When side panels, brackets, or tight case layouts reduce vertical clearance.
Importance: LOW
AMD Radeon R7 250 is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 127 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 127 mm.111 mm vs 127 mm
1 slot/s slimmer design
AMD Radeon R7 250 occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (1 slot/s vs 2 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2 slot/s.
What it is: Number of PCIe slots occupied by the card
When it matters: When you need room for another PCIe card or better airflow under the GPU.
Importance: LOW
AMD Radeon R7 250 occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (1 slot/s vs 2 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2 slot/s.1 slot/s vs 2 slot/s
1 more DVI outputs
AMD Radeon R7 250 has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
What it is: Number of DVI display outputs available
When it matters: When you still use an older monitor that depends on DVI.
Importance: LOW
AMD Radeon R7 250 has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.1 vs 0
5.58x cheaper
AMD Radeon R7 250 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£95 vs £530).
AMD Radeon R7 250 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£95 vs £530).£95 vs £530
Better FP64 ratio
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
8x larger L2 cache
AMD Radeon R7 250 has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (256 MB vs 32 MB). The average graphics card has 32 MB L2 cache.
Supports multi-GPU linking
AMD Radeon R7 250 supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
1 more DVI outputs
AMD Radeon R7 250 has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
69.8% lower TDP
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (65 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
38.5% lower PSU requirement
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (400 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
70.5% lower peak power draw
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (65 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
117.37 mm shorter card length
AMD Radeon R7 250 is shorter than the average graphics card (168 mm vs 285.37 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285.37 mm.
16 mm lower card height
AMD Radeon R7 250 is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 127 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 127 mm.
1 slot/s slimmer design
AMD Radeon R7 250 occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (1 slot/s vs 2 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2 slot/s.

Platform & Features

Connectivity & Media

Power & Cooling

Why is AMD Radeon R7 250 worse than the average graphics card?

Show more

Hide

58% lower boost clock speed
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,050 MHz vs 2,500 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,500 MHz.
32 fewer compute units
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
47.9% lower base clock speed
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,000 MHz vs 1,920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1,920 MHz.
160 fewer TMUs
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (24 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
No CUDA support
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
56 fewer ROPs
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (8 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
96.5% lower compute throughput
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (0.8 TFLOPS vs 23.105 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 23.105 TFLOPS.
90.4% lower FP64 performance
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0 TFLOPS vs 0.4651 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.4651 TFLOPS.
3,968 fewer FP32 units
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (384 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
128 bit narrower memory bus
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
11 GB less VRAM
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (1 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
83.6% lower memory bandwidth
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (73.6 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
75.8% slower memory speed
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (4,600 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
34.3% slower VRAM clock
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,150 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
87.5% smaller L1 cache
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (16 vs 128). The average graphics card has 128 L1 cache.
5.6x larger process node
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a higher process node than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
No ray tracing
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
No FSR support
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not support FSR, the average graphics card does.
10 older
AMD Radeon R7 250 was released earlier than the average graphics card (2,013 vs 2,023).
Older PCIe version
AMD Radeon R7 250 supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4.0).
No AI upscalers
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
No XeSS support
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
No mesh shaders
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
Older Vulkan version
AMD Radeon R7 250 supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4).
No DirectStorage support
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
Older OpenCL version
AMD Radeon R7 250 supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 3.0).
No sampler feedback
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
95.7% fewer transistors
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (950 million vs 21,900 million). The average graphics card has 21,900 million transistors.
3 fewer DisplayPort outputs
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (0 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
No AV1 encoding
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
2 fewer displays supported
AMD Radeon R7 250 supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (2 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
No AV1 decoding
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
No DSC support
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
Older HDMI version
AMD Radeon R7 250 supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4a vs 2.1).
Older DisplayPort version
AMD Radeon R7 250 supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
Not VR ready
AMD Radeon R7 250 is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
Lower display resolution
AMD Radeon R7 250 supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (2560x1600 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
2 fewer fans
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
No fan stop
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
28 dB noisier at idle
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (28 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
4 °C lower thermal ceiling
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (97 °C vs 93 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 93 °C.
No backplate
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
No RGB lighting
AMD Radeon R7 250 does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.
58% lower boost clock speed
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,050 MHz vs 2,500 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,500 MHz.
What it is: Maximum boost frequency the GPU can reach under load
When it matters: When you want a rough idea of peak advertised frequency, while knowing real sustained clocks still depend on cooling and power limits.
Importance: HIGH
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,050 MHz vs 2,500 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,500 MHz.1050 MHz vs 2500 MHz
128 bit narrower memory bus
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
What it is: Width of the memory interface bus in bits
When it matters: When you care about steadier performance at higher resolutions, heavier texture settings, or ray-traced workloads that stress memory traffic.
Importance: HIGH
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.128 bit vs 256 bit
5.6x larger process node
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a higher process node than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
What it is: Size of the manufacturing process in nanometers
When it matters: When process node differences may affect power, heat, and overall efficiency.
Importance: MEDIUM
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a higher process node than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.28 nm vs 5 nm
32 fewer compute units
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
What it is: Total number of shader multiprocessors or compute units
When it matters: When you want a better sense of the GPU's overall parallel hardware resources before relying on game benchmarks alone.
Importance: HIGH
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.8 vs 40
11 GB less VRAM
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (1 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
What it is: Total video memory available on the graphics card
When it matters: When you play at high settings, use texture mods, or work with large creative projects.
Importance: HIGH
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (1 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.1 GB vs 12 GB
2 fewer fans
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
What it is: Total number of cooling fans
When it matters: When you compare cooler designs and want one more clue about thermal potential.
Importance: MEDIUM
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).1 vs 3
47.9% lower base clock speed
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,000 MHz vs 1,920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1,920 MHz.
What it is: Base operating frequency of the GPU core under standard conditions
When it matters: When you want to understand the card's guaranteed starting frequency instead of looking only at optimistic boost figures.
Importance: HIGH
AMD Radeon R7 250 has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,000 MHz vs 1,920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1,920 MHz.1000 MHz vs 1920 MHz
160 fewer TMUs
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (24 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
What it is: Total count of texture mapping units on the GPU
When it matters: When texture-heavy gaming performance matters and you want extra hardware context behind texture-rate claims.
Importance: HIGH
AMD Radeon R7 250 has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (24 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.24 vs 184

Platform & Features

Connectivity & Media

Power & Cooling

Graphic comparison of AMD Radeon R7 250 and

Attribute category

Attribute

No results found

Third-party reviews

United Kingdom

United States

(Reviews last updated: June 2026)

What customers like about AMD Radeon R7 250?

Affordable entry-level price point, making it an attractive option for budget PC builders or upgraders.
Low power consumption (65W TDP) allows it to run without a six-pin power connector in most standard versions.
Compact design is suitable for small form factor (SFF) cases and basic office PC upgrades.
Provides essential modern display outputs including HDMI, DVI, and VGA for flexible connectivity.
Efficient choice for older 'retro' gaming or as a general-purpose GPU for non-gaming tasks.
Quiet operation reported for many models, specifically passive versions like the Sapphire Ultimate.

What customers dislike about AMD Radeon R7 250?

Weak performance in modern gaming, often requiring settings to be dropped to 'Low' even for 1080p resolution.
Confusion in the market due to two versions: a much slower DDR3 model and a slightly better GDDR5 variant.
Outdated architecture (Oland) lacks support for modern features like TrueAudio or advanced DirectX 12 levels.
Limited 1GB VRAM in standard models is insufficient for many recent gaming titles.
Not ideal for future-proofing as significantly faster cards (like the R7 260X or GTX 750) are available for a small price increase.
Can struggle with loud fan noise or heat under heavy load in some low-profile or budget-built models.

Expert reviews

expertreviews.co.uk

20/01/2014

AMD Radeon R7 250 review Custom PC Review |

The Expert Reviews review of the AMD Radeon R7 250 highlights it as an entry-level graphics card powered by 384 stream processors, a 1.05GHz clock speed, and 1GB of graphics memory operating at 1.15GHz. A major pro identified in the review is its reliance entirely on motherboard bus power from a PCI Express x16 slot, which eliminates the need for extra power connectors and makes it...Read more

custompcreview.com

09/04/2014

ASUS Radeon R7 240, R7 250 Review - Custom PC Review

The ASUS Radeon R7 240 and R7 250 are entry-level graphics cards tailored for budget-conscious users and older pre-built systems that require basic multimedia capabilities or light gaming at lower resolutions. Built on AMD's 28nm "Oland" GPU architecture, the R7 240 utilizes the slightly cut-down Oland Pro core with 320 stream processors paired with 2GB of slower DDR3 memory. In...Read more

hexus.net

12/02/2014

Review: Sapphire Radeon R7 250, Dual Graphics and Mantle

The Sapphire Radeon R7 250 (2GB DDR3) is a budget-friendly, mainstream graphics card based on AMD’s 28nm "Oland" GPU architecture, which measures 90mm² and operates without an external power connector thanks to its low 65W power draw. The card features 384 processors and a peak core clock speed of 1,050MHz under Boost. This specific 2GB model is built on a compact, sub-six-inch PCB,...Read more

m.hexus.net

12/02/2014

Review: Sapphire Radeon R7 250, Dual Graphics and Mantle

The Sapphire Radeon R7 250 (2GB) is a low-cost, mainstream graphics card based on AMD’s 28nm "Oland" architecture, designed to balance modest gaming and productivity needs without requiring an external power connector. A major benefit of this card is its highly frugal 65W power consumption and its ability to pair effectively with modern AMD APUs for boosted performance through Dual...Read more

computerbase.de

08/09/2014

Günstige Grafikkarten im Test: 19 × AMD und Nvidia von 20–90 Euro im Vergleich

This 2014 ComputerBase review evaluates 19 budget graphics cards from AMD and Nvidia priced between €20 and €90, highlighting how naming conventions and hardware variations create mass consumer confusion in the low-end market. The main advantage of this product tier is the highly accessible entry-level pricing for basic display outputs or upgrading old systems, with specific...Read more

elchapuzasinformatico.com

27/03/2014

Review: AMD R7 240/250 Vs Nvidia GT 630/640

The El Chapuzas Informático review indicates the AMD Radeon R7 250 and R7 240 outperform the Nvidia GT 640 and GT 630 in low-end gaming benchmarks, showcasing higher memory bandwidth and modern architecture. The R7 series offers excellent thermal efficiency and a 30% to 50% performance advantage over the tested Nvidia models, though all cards struggle with high settings in modern,...Read more

tomshw.it

24/03/2014

Radeon R7 240 e Radeon R7 250: si gioca spendendo meno di 100 euro

summary of the Tom's Hardware budget graphics card review: The Tom's Hardware review evaluates whether entry-level graphics cards, specifically the AMD Radeon R7 240 and Radeon R7 250, can convert older or basic desktop computers into viable gaming platforms for under €100. Tested against older modern titles like Battlefield 4 and Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag, these graphics...Read more

tweakers.net

24/10/2013

AMD R9 290X: Olympiër voor de Titan

The Tweakers review of the AMD Radeon R9 290X, based on the "Hawaii" architecture with 2,816 stream processors and a 512-bit memory bus, highlights its outstanding price-to-performance ratio, trading blows with the GTX Titan while costing significantly less. The card delivers exceptional gaming performance at 4K resolutions and includes modern features like Mantle API support and...Read more

hardware.info

16/12/2013

XFX Radeon R7 240 / 250 Passive review: passief gekoelde instapkaartjes

The hardware review from Hardware Info evaluates the XFX Radeon R7 240 Core Edition Passive 2GB and the XFX Radeon R7 250 Core Edition Passive 1GB. These entry-level graphics cards feature 28nm "Oland" GPUs. The lower-tier R7 240 is built with 320 stream processors and a 780 MHz core clock speed, while the higher-tier R7 250 utilizes 384 stream processors running at a boosted 1050...Read more

Video reviews

Best alternatives

MSI GeForce GT 1030 2G LP OC

Graphics cards

NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 DDR4

Graphics cards

ASUS GeForce GTX 650

Graphics cards

AMD Radeon RX 460

Graphics cards

ASUS Phoenix GeForce GT 1030 OC Edition

Graphics cards

AMD Radeon RX 550

Graphics cards

AMD Radeon R7 265

Graphics cards

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750

Graphics cards

AMD Radeon HD 7750

Graphics cards

AMD Radeon R7 360

Graphics cards

Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 550 4GB

Graphics cards

AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100

Graphics cards

Compare AMD Radeon R7 250 with

Compare