FireStream 9250 vs GeForce RTX 3060
FireStream 9250
Popular choices:
GeForce RTX 3060
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. The FireStream 9250 is positioned at rank #340 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. 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 FireStream 9250
Performance Per Dollar GeForce RTX 3060
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 3060 is significantly newer (2021 vs 2008). The GeForce RTX 3060 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 RTX 3060 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1358.8% higher G3D Mark score and 1100% more VRAM (12 GB vs 1 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FireStream 9250.
| Insight | FireStream 9250 | GeForce RTX 3060 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1358.8%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1358.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) | 🔮Strong Longevity (Ampere / 8nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 2 Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (12 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce RTX 3060 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $289 (vs $49), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 147.3% better value per dollar than the FireStream 9250.
| Insight | FireStream 9250 | GeForce RTX 3060 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+147.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($49) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($289) |
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 RTX 3060
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 RTX 3060
The GeForce RTX 3060 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 12 2021. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 1320 MHz to 1777 MHz. It has 3584 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 170W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 28 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 16,995 points. Launch price was $329.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the FireStream 9250 scores 1,165 versus the GeForce RTX 3060's 16,995 — the GeForce RTX 3060 leads by 1358.8%. The FireStream 9250 is built on TeraScale while the GeForce RTX 3060 uses Ampere, both on 55 nm vs 8 nm. Shader units: 800 (FireStream 9250) vs 3,584 (GeForce RTX 3060). Raw compute: 1 TFLOPS (FireStream 9250) vs 12.74 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 3060).
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce RTX 3060 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,165 | 16,995+1359% |
| Architecture | TeraScale | Ampere |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 8 nm |
| Shading Units | 800 | 3584+348% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1 TFLOPS | 12.74 TFLOPS+1174% |
| ROPs | 16 | 48+200% |
| TMUs | 40 | 112+180% |
| L1 Cache | 0.16 MB | 3.5 MB+2088% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 3 MB+1100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce RTX 3060 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 2.0 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 / AFMF (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FireStream 9250 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 3060 has 12 GB. The GeForce RTX 3060 offers 1100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (FireStream 9250) vs 3 MB (GeForce RTX 3060) — the GeForce RTX 3060 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce RTX 3060 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 12 GB+1100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 192-bit+200% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 3 MB+1100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (FireStream 9250) vs 12 Ultimate (GeForce RTX 3060). Vulkan: N/A vs 1.3. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 4.
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce RTX 3060 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 12 Ultimate+19% |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6+39% |
| Max Displays | 1 | 4+300% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (FireStream 9250) vs NVENC 7th Gen (GeForce RTX 3060). Decoder: UVD 2.0 vs NVDEC 5th Gen. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1 (FireStream 9250) vs AV1,H.265,H.264,VP9 (GeForce RTX 3060).
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce RTX 3060 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | NVENC 7th Gen |
| Decoder | UVD 2.0 | NVDEC 5th Gen |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1 | AV1,H.265,H.264,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The FireStream 9250 draws 150W versus the GeForce RTX 3060's 170W — a 12.5% difference. The FireStream 9250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FireStream 9250) vs 550W (GeForce RTX 3060). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 8-pin. Card length: 234mm vs 242mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: Unknown vs 75.
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce RTX 3060 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W-12% | 170W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-36% | 550W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 8-pin |
| Length | 234mm | 242mm |
| Height | 111mm | 112mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | Unknown-100% | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 7.8 | 100.0+1182% |
Value Analysis
The FireStream 9250 launched at $999 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the GeForce RTX 3060 launched at $329 and now averages $289. The FireStream 9250 costs 83% less ($240 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 23.8 (FireStream 9250) vs 58.8 (GeForce RTX 3060) — the GeForce RTX 3060 offers 147.1% better value. The GeForce RTX 3060 is the newer GPU (2021 vs 2008).
| Feature | FireStream 9250 | GeForce RTX 3060 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $999 | $329-67% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49-83% | $289 |
| Performance per Dollar | 23.8 | 58.8+147% |
| Codename | RV770 | GA106 |
| Release | June 16 2008 | January 12 2021 |
| Ranking | #840 | #114 |
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 RTX 3060
