FireStream 9250 vs Radeon HD 4850 X2
FireStream 9250
Popular choices:
Radeon HD 4850 X2
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 Radeon HD 4850 X2 is on rank 291, so the Radeon HD 4850 X2 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 Radeon HD 4850 X2
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FireStream 9250 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD 4850 X2.
| Insight | FireStream 9250 | Radeon HD 4850 X2 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon HD 4850 X2 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon HD 4850 X2 holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $49), it costs 18% less, resulting in a 19% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FireStream 9250 | Radeon HD 4850 X2 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+19%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($49) | ✅More affordable ($40) |
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 Radeon HD 4850 X2
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.
Radeon HD 4850 X2
The Radeon HD 4850 X2 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 7 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 800 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,132 points. Launch price was $420.
Graphics Performance
The FireStream 9250 scores 1,165 and the Radeon HD 4850 X2 reaches 1,132 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FireStream 9250 is built on TeraScale while the Radeon HD 4850 X2 uses TeraScale, both on a 55 nm process. Shader units: 800 (FireStream 9250) vs 800 (Radeon HD 4850 X2). Raw compute: 1 TFLOPS (FireStream 9250) vs 1 TFLOPS ×2 (Radeon HD 4850 X2).
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | Radeon HD 4850 X2 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,165+3% | 1,132 |
| Architecture | TeraScale | TeraScale |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 800 | 800 ×2 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1 TFLOPS | 1 TFLOPS ×2 |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 ×2 |
| TMUs | 40 | 40 ×2 |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB | 160 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | Radeon HD 4850 X2 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 1 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | Radeon HD 4850 X2 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (FireStream 9250) vs 10.1 (Radeon HD 4850 X2). Vulkan: N/A vs N/A. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 4.
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | Radeon HD 4850 X2 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 10.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 1 | 4+300% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (FireStream 9250) vs None (Radeon HD 4850 X2). Decoder: UVD 2.0 vs UVD 2.2. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1 (FireStream 9250) vs MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 (Radeon HD 4850 X2).
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | Radeon HD 4850 X2 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | UVD 2.0 | UVD 2.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1 | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The FireStream 9250 draws 150W versus the Radeon HD 4850 X2's 250W — a 50% difference. The FireStream 9250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FireStream 9250) vs 500W (Radeon HD 4850 X2). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin. Card length: 234mm vs 267mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: Unknown vs 95.
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | Radeon HD 4850 X2 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W-40% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-30% | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| Length | 234mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | Unknown-100% | 95 |
| Perf/Watt | 7.8+73% | 4.5 |
Value Analysis
The FireStream 9250 launched at $999 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the Radeon HD 4850 X2 launched at $399 and now averages $40. The Radeon HD 4850 X2 costs 18.4% less ($9 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 23.8 (FireStream 9250) vs 28.3 (Radeon HD 4850 X2) — the Radeon HD 4850 X2 offers 18.9% better value.
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | Radeon HD 4850 X2 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $999 | $399-60% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49 | $40-18% |
| Performance per Dollar | 23.8 | 28.3+19% |
| Codename | RV770 | R700 |
| Release | June 16 2008 | November 7 2008 |
| Ranking | #840 | #848 |
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 Radeon HD 4850 X2
