Quadro T1000 Mobile vs Radeon R7 250X

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 250X with Quadro T1000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

R7 250X
2014
2 GB GDDR5, 80 Watt
5.88

T1000 Mobile outperforms R7 250X by a whopping 188% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking586317
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.63no data
Power efficiency5.3024.46
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameCape VerdeTU117
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 February 2014 (10 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99 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 cores640768
Core clock speedno data1395 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1455 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate38.0069.84
Floating-point processing power1.216 TFLOPS2.235 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs4048

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1625 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth96 GB/s128.0 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 HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
CUDA-7.5

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.

R7 250X 5.88
T1000 Mobile 16.95
+188%

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.

R7 250X 2268
T1000 Mobile 6540
+188%

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.

R7 250X 2860
T1000 Mobile 8727
+205%

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 HD18−21
−228%
59
+228%
4K16−18
−200%
48
+200%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 48
+0%
48
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 53
+0%
53
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 119
+0%
119
+0%
Hitman 3 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 83
+0%
83
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 67
+0%
67
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 47
+0%
47
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 41
+0%
41
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 114
+0%
114
+0%
Hitman 3 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 63
+0%
63
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 52
+0%
52
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 29
+0%
29
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 32
+0%
32
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 31
+0%
31
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Hitman 3 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35
+0%
35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50
+0%
50
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Hitman 3 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

This is how R7 250X and T1000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T1000 Mobile is 228% faster in 1080p
  • T1000 Mobile is 200% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.88 16.95
Recency 13 February 2014 27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 50 Watt

T1000 Mobile has a 188.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 60% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T1000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 250X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 250X is a desktop card while Quadro T1000 Mobile is a mobile 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 R7 250X
Radeon R7 250X
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 Mobile
Quadro T1000 Mobile

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.


3.9 161 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 153 votes

Rate Quadro T1000 Mobile 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.