FireStream 9250 vs GeForce 830A
FireStream 9250
Popular choices:
GeForce 830A
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. The FireStream 9250 is positioned at rank 340 and the GeForce 830A is on rank 344, so the FireStream 9250 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FireStream 9250
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 830A
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 830A is significantly newer (2014 vs 2008). The GeForce 830A likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The FireStream 9250 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 830A is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.7% higher G3D Mark score. However, the FireStream 9250 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| 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 | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 830A offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce 830A holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $49), it costs 39% less, resulting in a 64.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+64.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($49) | ✅More affordable ($30) |
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 FireStream 9250 and GeForce 830A
FireStream 9250
The FireStream 9250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 16 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,165 points.
GeForce 830A
The GeForce 830A is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 22 2014. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1082 MHz to 1150 MHz. It has 256 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,173 points.
Graphics Performance
The FireStream 9250 scores 1,165 and the GeForce 830A reaches 1,173 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FireStream 9250 is built on TeraScale while the GeForce 830A uses Maxwell, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 800 (FireStream 9250) vs 256 (GeForce 830A). Raw compute: 1 TFLOPS (FireStream 9250) vs 0.5888 TFLOPS (GeForce 830A).
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,165 | 1,173 |
| Architecture | TeraScale | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 800+213% | 256 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1 TFLOPS+70% | 0.5888 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 40+150% | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB+25% | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FireStream 9250 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce 830A has 512 MB. The FireStream 9250 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (FireStream 9250) vs 1 MB (GeForce 830A) — the GeForce 830A has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB+100% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (FireStream 9250) vs 12 (11_0) (GeForce 830A). Vulkan: N/A vs 1.1. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 2.
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 12 (11_0)+19% |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6+39% |
| Max Displays | 1 | 2+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (FireStream 9250) vs NVENC 3.0 (GeForce 830A). Decoder: UVD 2.0 vs VP6. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1 (FireStream 9250) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce 830A).
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | NVENC 3.0 |
| Decoder | UVD 2.0 | VP6 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1 | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The FireStream 9250 draws 150W versus the GeForce 830A's 33W — a 127.9% difference. The GeForce 830A is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FireStream 9250) vs 350W (GeForce 830A). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Card length: 234mm vs 0mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: Unknown vs 80.
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 33W-78% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | 234mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | Unknown-100% | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 7.8 | 35.5+355% |
Value Analysis
The FireStream 9250 launched at $999 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the GeForce 830A launched at $100 and now averages $30. The GeForce 830A costs 38.8% less ($19 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 23.8 (FireStream 9250) vs 39.1 (GeForce 830A) — the GeForce 830A offers 64.3% better value. The GeForce 830A is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2008).
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce 830A |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $999 | $100-90% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49 | $30-39% |
| Performance per Dollar | 23.8 | 39.1+64% |
| Codename | RV770 | GM108 |
| Release | June 16 2008 | July 22 2014 |
| Ranking | #840 | #832 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FireStream 9250 and GeForce 830A
