ATI Radeon 9250 vs GeForce GTX 485M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 485M with Radeon 9250, including specs and performance data.

GTX 485M
2011
2 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
6.12
+61100%

GTX 485M outperforms ATI 9250 by a whopping 61100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking5811525
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.19no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameGF104RV280
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date5 January 2011 (13 years ago)1 March 2004 (20 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores384no data
Core clock speed1150 MHz240 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million36 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Wattno data
Texture fill rate36.800.96
Floating-point processing power0.8832 TFLOPSno data
ROPs324
TMUs644

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)AGP 8x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone
SLI options+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount2 GB64 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz200 MHz
Memory bandwidth96.0 GB/s3.2 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)8.1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.51.4
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 485M 6.12
+61100%
ATI 9250 0.01

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 485M 2359
+117850%
ATI 9250 2

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p48-0−1
Full HD65-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8 0−1
Battlefield 5 16−18 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11 0−1
Far Cry 5 12−14 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 40−45 0−1
Hitman 3 12−14 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 0−1
Metro Exodus 16−18 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8 0−1
Battlefield 5 16−18 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11 0−1
Far Cry 5 12−14 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 40−45 0−1
Hitman 3 12−14 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 0−1
Metro Exodus 16−18 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11 0−1
Far Cry 5 12−14 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 40−45 0−1
Hitman 3 12−14 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 18−20 0−1
Hitman 3 10−11 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14 0−1
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5 0−1
Hitman 3 2−3 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16 0−1
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.12 0.01
Recency 5 January 2011 1 March 2004
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 64 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 150 nm

GTX 485M has a 61100% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 275% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 485M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 9250 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 485M is a notebook card while Radeon 9250 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 485M
GeForce GTX 485M
ATI Radeon 9250
Radeon 9250

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


1 3 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 485M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 52 votes

Rate Radeon 9250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.