GeForce 9100 vs Radeon R7 250E

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking668not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.14no data
Power efficiency5.50no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameCape VerdeC78
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date20 December 2013 (10 years ago)17 April 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109 no data

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 cores51216
Core clock speed800 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate25.604.000
Floating-point processing power0.8192 TFLOPS0.0384 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs328

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 3.0 x16PCI
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1125 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth72 GB/sno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 20 December 2013 17 April 2007
Chip lithography 28 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 40 Watt

R7 250E has an age advantage of 6 years, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 9100, on the other hand, has 37.5% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R7 250E and GeForce 9100. We've got no test results to judge.


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 R7 250E
Radeon R7 250E
NVIDIA GeForce 9100
GeForce 9100

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.


4 23 votes

Rate Radeon R7 250E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 19 votes

Rate GeForce 9100 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.