Radeon PRO W7900 vs HD 6250

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6250 with Radeon PRO W7900, including specs and performance data.

HD 6250
2011
512 MB GDDR3, 19 Watt
0.24

PRO W7900 outperforms HD 6250 by a whopping 31479% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking136213
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data16.79
Power efficiency0.8717.61
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameCedarNavi 31
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date31 January 2011 (13 years ago)13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores806144
Core clock speed650 MHz1855 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2495 MHz
Number of transistors292 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)19 Watt295 Watt
Texture fill rate5.200958.1
Floating-point processing power0.104 TFLOPS61.32 TFLOPS
ROPs4192
TMUs8384
Ray Tracing Coresno data96

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length168 mm280 mm
Width1-slot3-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB48 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth8 GB/s864.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.7
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.22.2
VulkanN/A1.3

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.

HD 6250 0.24
PRO W7900 75.79
+31479%

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.

HD 6250 93
PRO W7900 29204
+31302%

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:

Full HD6
−30733%
1850−1900
+30733%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.16

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−29900%
600−650
+29900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−29900%
900−950
+29900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−29900%
600−650
+29900%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−29900%
600−650
+29900%
Hitman 3 4−5
−31150%
1250−1300
+31150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−31150%
2500−2550
+31150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−31150%
1250−1300
+31150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−31329%
8800−8850
+31329%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−29900%
900−950
+29900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−29900%
600−650
+29900%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−29900%
600−650
+29900%
Hitman 3 4−5
−31150%
1250−1300
+31150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−31150%
2500−2550
+31150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−31150%
1250−1300
+31150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−31011%
2800−2850
+31011%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−31329%
8800−8850
+31329%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−29900%
900−950
+29900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−29900%
600−650
+29900%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−29900%
600−650
+29900%
Hitman 3 4−5
−31150%
1250−1300
+31150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−31150%
2500−2550
+31150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−31150%
1250−1300
+31150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−31011%
2800−2850
+31011%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−31329%
8800−8850
+31329%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
−30733%
1850−1900
+30733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−29900%
600−650
+29900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−29900%
600−650
+29900%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−29900%
300−310
+29900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−29900%
600−650
+29900%

This is how HD 6250 and PRO W7900 compete in popular games:

  • PRO W7900 is 30733% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.24 75.79
Recency 31 January 2011 13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 48 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 19 Watt 295 Watt

HD 6250 has 1452.6% lower power consumption.

PRO W7900, on the other hand, has a 31479.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 9500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6250 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6250 is a desktop card while Radeon PRO W7900 is a workstation 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.


AMD Radeon HD 6250
Radeon HD 6250
AMD Radeon PRO W7900
Radeon PRO W7900

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.


3.4 80 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 75 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7900 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.