GeForce GTS 250 vs Radeon R7 M265
GeForce GTS 250
Popular choices:
Radeon R7 M265
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 GeForce GTS 250 is positioned at rank 246 and the Radeon R7 M265 is on rank 249, so the GeForce GTS 250 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTS 250
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R7 M265
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTS 250 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.6% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Radeon R7 M265 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce GTS 250 | Radeon R7 M265 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.6%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTS 250 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTS 250 holds the technical lead. Priced at $20 (vs $30), it costs 33% less, resulting in a 52.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTS 250 | Radeon R7 M265 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+52.4%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($20) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($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 GeForce GTS 250 and Radeon R7 M265
GeForce GTS 250
The GeForce GTS 250 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 13 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 783 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 106W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 569 points. Launch price was $129.
Radeon R7 M265
The Radeon R7 M265 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in February 13 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 925 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 560 points. Launch price was $149.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTS 250 scores 569 and the Radeon R7 M265 reaches 560 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTS 250 is built on Fermi while the Radeon R7 M265 uses GCN 1.0, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 192 (GeForce GTS 250) vs 1,024 (Radeon R7 M265). Raw compute: 0.6013 TFLOPS (GeForce GTS 250) vs 1.894 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 M265).
| Feature | GeForce GTS 250 | Radeon R7 M265 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 569+2% | 560 |
| Architecture | Fermi | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 1024+433% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6013 TFLOPS | 1.894 TFLOPS+215% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 32 | 64+100% |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTS 250 | Radeon R7 M265 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 GeForce GTS 250 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R7 M265 has 4 GB. The Radeon R7 M265 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (GeForce GTS 250) vs 512 KB (Radeon R7 M265) — the Radeon R7 M265 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTS 250 | Radeon R7 M265 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 4 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce GTS 250) vs 12 (11_1) (Radeon R7 M265). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.4. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GTS 250 | Radeon R7 M265 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 (11_1)+8% |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.4+33% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: PureVideo HD VP5 (GeForce GTS 250) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon R7 M265). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP5 vs UVD 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTS 250) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Radeon R7 M265).
| Feature | GeForce GTS 250 | Radeon R7 M265 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | PureVideo HD VP5 | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP5 | UVD 4.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTS 250 draws 106W versus the Radeon R7 M265's 150W — a 34.4% difference. The GeForce GTS 250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 450W (GeForce GTS 250) vs 350W (Radeon R7 M265). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs Mobile. Typical load temperature: 90°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTS 250 | Radeon R7 M265 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 106W-29% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 450W | 350W-22% |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | Mobile |
| Length | 229mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 90°C | 80°C-11% |
| Perf/Watt | 5.4+46% | 3.7 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTS 250 launched at $129 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the Radeon R7 M265 launched at $130 and now averages $30. The GeForce GTS 250 costs 33.3% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 28.4 (GeForce GTS 250) vs 18.7 (Radeon R7 M265) — the GeForce GTS 250 offers 51.9% better value. The Radeon R7 M265 is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2010).
| Feature | GeForce GTS 250 | Radeon R7 M265 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $129 | $130 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20-33% | $30 |
| Performance per Dollar | 28.4+52% | 18.7 |
| Codename | GF106 | Pitcairn |
| Release | September 13 2010 | February 13 2014 |
| Ranking | #791 | #489 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTS 250 and Radeon R7 M265
