Radeon 780M vs HD 8250

Place in the ranking	1216	298
Place by popularity	not in top-100	47
Power efficiency	4.79	85.22
Architecture	GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Kalindi	Hawx Point
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	23 May 2013 (11 years ago)	6 December 2023 (less than a year 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 cores	128	768
Core clock speed	300 MHz	800 MHz
Boost clock speed	400 MHz	2700 MHz
Number of transistors	1,178 million	25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	8 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	3.200	129.6
Floating-point processing power	0.1024 TFLOPS	8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	32
TMUs	8	48
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	12

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).

Interface	IGP	PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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 type	System Shared	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	System Shared
Memory bus width	System Shared	System Shared
Memory clock speed	System Shared	System Shared
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 Connectors

No outputs

Portable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.3	6.8
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

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 8250 0.55

Radeon 780M 18.33
+3233%

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 8250 212

Radeon 780M 7071
+3235%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD 8250 423

Radeon 780M 12785
+2926%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

HD 8250 1317

Radeon 780M 41622
+3060%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 8250 254

Radeon 780M 7977
+3047%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

HD 8250 1965

Radeon 780M 48105
+2348%

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 HD	1−2 −3500%	36 +3500%
1440p	0−1	20
4K	-0−1	15

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−1200%

39
+1200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −925%	40−45 +925%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1133%	35−40 +1133%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −933%	31 +933%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −4800%	45−50 +4800%
Hitman 3	5−6 −600%	35−40 +600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −718%	90−95 +718%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −900%	60−65 +900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −190%	85−90 +190%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −925%	40−45 +925%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1133%	35−40 +1133%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −700%	24 +700%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −4800%	45−50 +4800%
Hitman 3	5−6 −600%	35−40 +600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −718%	90−95 +718%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −800%	54 +800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −320%	40−45 +320%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −190%	85−90 +190%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −925%	40−45 +925%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1133%	35−40 +1133%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −667%	23 +667%
Hitman 3	5−6 −600%	35−40 +600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −382%	53 +382%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −667%	46 +667%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −190%	29 +190%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 +66.7%	18 −66.7%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−2700%

27−30
+2700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	18−20
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −2000%	21−24 +2000%
Hitman 3	6−7 −267%	21−24 +267%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −1133%	35−40 +1133%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −10900%	110−120 +10900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−900%

30−33
+900%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −1000%	10−12 +1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	9−10

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−700%

16−18
+700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Battlefield 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Metro Exodus	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Battlefield 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Metro Exodus	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

45−50

+0%

45−50

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5

35−40

+0%

35−40

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	100−105 +0%	100−105 +0%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	32 +0%	32 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20 +0%	20 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Hitman 3	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	15 +0%	15 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	17 +0%	17 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

This is how HD 8250 and Radeon 780M compete in popular games:

Radeon 780M is 3500% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD 8250 is 67% faster.
in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 780M is 10900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD 8250 is ahead in 1 test (1%)
Radeon 780M is ahead in 34 tests (49%)
there's a draw in 35 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.55	18.33
Recency	23 May 2013	6 December 2023
Chip lithography	28 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	8 Watt	15 Watt

HD 8250 has 87.5% lower power consumption.

Radeon 780M, on the other hand, has a 3232.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 600% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon 780M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8250 in performance tests.

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