CPU
GPU
GeForce PCX 5750
Popular choices:
Radeon X1250
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 GeForce PCX 5750 is positioned at rank #366 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 GeForce PCX 5750
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon X1250 is significantly newer (2017 vs 2010). The Radeon X1250 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce PCX 5750 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon X1250 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 5.7% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (512 MB vs 128 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce PCX 5750.
| Insight | GeForce PCX 5750 | Radeon X1250 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-5.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+5.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce PCX 5750 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce PCX 5750 holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $49), it costs 69% less, resulting in a 209% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce PCX 5750 | Radeon X1250 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+209%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($15) | ⚠️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 GeForce PCX 5750 and Radeon X1250
GeForce PCX 5750
The GeForce PCX 5750 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 7 2010. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 732 MHz. It has 480 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 219W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 35 points. Launch price was $349.
Radeon X1250
The Radeon X1250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 20 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1100 MHz to 1183 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 37 points. Launch price was $79.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce PCX 5750 scores 35 versus the Radeon X1250's 37 — the Radeon X1250 leads by 5.7%. The GeForce PCX 5750 is built on Fermi 2.0 while the Radeon X1250 uses GCN 4.0, both on 40 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 480 (GeForce PCX 5750) vs 512 (Radeon X1250). Raw compute: 1.405 TFLOPS (GeForce PCX 5750) vs 1.211 TFLOPS (Radeon X1250).
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5750 | Radeon X1250 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 35 | 37+6% |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 480 | 512+7% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.405 TFLOPS+16% | 1.211 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 40+150% | 16 |
| TMUs | 60+88% | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 960 KB+650% | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 640 KB+150% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5750 | Radeon X1250 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 PCX 5750 comes with 128 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon X1250 has 512 MB. The Radeon X1250 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 640 KB (GeForce PCX 5750) vs 256 KB (Radeon X1250) — the GeForce PCX 5750 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5750 | Radeon X1250 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.125 GB | 0.5 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 640 KB+150% | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 9.0a (GeForce PCX 5750) vs 9.0b (Radeon X1250). Vulkan: N/A vs N/A. OpenGL: 1.5 vs 2.0. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5750 | Radeon X1250 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 9.0a | 9.0b |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| OpenGL | 1.5 | 2.0+33% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce PCX 5750) vs Avivo (Radeon X1250). Decoder: None vs Avivo. Supported codecs: MPEG-2 (GeForce PCX 5750) vs MPEG-2,MPEG-4,WMV9 (Radeon X1250).
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5750 | Radeon X1250 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | Avivo |
| Decoder | None | Avivo |
| Codecs | MPEG-2 | MPEG-2,MPEG-4,WMV9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce PCX 5750 draws 219W versus the Radeon X1250's 50W — a 125.7% difference. The Radeon X1250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce PCX 5750) vs 350W (Radeon X1250). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 168mm vs 0mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 70.
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5750 | Radeon X1250 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 219W | 50W-77% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 168mm | 0mm |
| Height | 100mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 80 | 70-13% |
| Perf/Watt | 0.2 | 0.7+250% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce PCX 5750 launched at $150 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the Radeon X1250 launched at $0 and now averages $49. The GeForce PCX 5750 costs 69.4% less ($34 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 2.3 (GeForce PCX 5750) vs 0.8 (Radeon X1250) — the GeForce PCX 5750 offers 187.5% better value. The Radeon X1250 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2010).
| Feature | GeForce PCX 5750 | Radeon X1250 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $150 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15-69% | $49 |
| Performance per Dollar | 2.3+187% | 0.8 |
| Codename | GF110 | Lexa |
| Release | December 7 2010 | April 20 2017 |
| Ranking | #497 | #668 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce PCX 5750 and Radeon X1250
