FirePro 2450 vs Radeon X1050
FirePro 2450
Popular choices:
Radeon X1050
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon X1050 is significantly newer (2025 vs 2013). The Radeon X1050 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The FirePro 2450 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro 2450 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 4.1% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (512 MB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon X1050.
| Insight | FirePro 2450 | Radeon X1050 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+4.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-4.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) (4nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro 2450 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $10 versus $49 for the Radeon X1050, it costs 80% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 410% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro 2450 | Radeon X1050 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+410%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($10) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($49) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro 2450 and Radeon X1050
FirePro 2450
The FirePro 2450 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 16 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 715 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 51 points.
Radeon X1050
The Radeon X1050 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 6 2025. It features the RDNA 3.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1295 MHz to 2800 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 32 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 49 points.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro 2450 scores 51 and the Radeon X1050 reaches 49 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro 2450 is built on GCN 1.0 while the Radeon X1050 uses RDNA 3.5, both on 28 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 384 (FirePro 2450) vs 2,048 (Radeon X1050). Raw compute: 0.5491 TFLOPS (FirePro 2450) vs 11.47 TFLOPS (Radeon X1050).
| Feature | FirePro 2450 | Radeon X1050 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 51+4% | 49 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | RDNA 3.5 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 4 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 2048+433% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.5491 TFLOPS | 11.47 TFLOPS+1989% |
| ROPs | 8 | 64+700% |
| TMUs | 24 | 128+433% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 8 MB+3100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro 2450 | Radeon X1050 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FirePro 2450 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon X1050 has 256 MB. The FirePro 2450 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (FirePro 2450) vs 8 MB (Radeon X1050) — the Radeon X1050 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro 2450 | Radeon X1050 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB+100% | 0.25 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 8 MB+3100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (FirePro 2450) vs 9_0b (Radeon X1050). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 2.
| Feature | FirePro 2450 | Radeon X1050 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1+12% | 9_0b |
| Max Displays | 4+100% | 2 |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro 2450 draws 150W versus the Radeon X1050's 55W — a 92.7% difference. The Radeon X1050 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro 2450) vs 350W (Radeon X1050). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 170mm vs 165mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | FirePro 2450 | Radeon X1050 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 55W-63% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 170mm | 165mm |
| Height | 69mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 60°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.3 | 0.9+200% |
Value Analysis
The FirePro 2450 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $10, while the Radeon X1050 launched at $0 and now averages $49. The FirePro 2450 costs 79.6% less ($39 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 5.1 (FirePro 2450) vs 1.0 (Radeon X1050) — the FirePro 2450 offers 410% better value. The Radeon X1050 is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2013).
| Feature | FirePro 2450 | Radeon X1050 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0 | $0 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-80% | $49 |
| Performance per Dollar | 5.1+410% | 1.0 |
| Codename | Opal | Strix Halo |
| Release | October 16 2013 | January 6 2025 |
| Ranking | #879 | #126 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FirePro 2450 and Radeon X1050
