MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 vs RADEON 9250

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.

MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 vs RADEON 9250 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 vs RADEON 9250: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

MOBILITY/RADEON 9000

2010

Why buy it

✅+33.3% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (512 MB vs 256 MB).
✅Draws 10W instead of 95W, a 85W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌2010 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 0.0 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $79 MSRP).

RADEON 9250

2015

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 0.0 vs 0 G3D/$ ($79 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅More future proof: GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (3 vs 4).
❌Less VRAM, with 256 MB vs 512 MB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2015 hardware with 256 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌850% higher power demand at 95W vs 10W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 33.3% in PassMark G3D (4 vs 3), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 512 MB vs 256 MB of VRAM. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

RADEON 9250 makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, RADEON 9250 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 has the stronger long-term case.

MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 vs RADEON 9250 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

MOBILITY/RADEON 9000

The MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 7 2010. It features the TeraScale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 700 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 10W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4 points.

RADEON 9250

The RADEON 9250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in September 29 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 735 MHz to 1000 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 95W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 scores 4 versus the RADEON 9250's 3 — the MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 leads by 33.3%. The MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 is built on TeraScale 2 while the RADEON 9250 uses GCN 3.0, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 800 (MOBILITY/RADEON 9000) vs 2,048 (RADEON 9250). Raw compute: 1.12 TFLOPS (MOBILITY/RADEON 9000) vs 4.096 TFLOPS (RADEON 9250).

Feature	MOBILITY/RADEON 9000	RADEON 9250
G3D Mark Score	4+33%	3
Architecture	TeraScale 2	GCN 3.0
Process Node	40 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	800	2048+156%
Compute (TFLOPS)	1.12 TFLOPS	4.096 TFLOPS+266%
ROPs	16	32+100%
TMUs	40	128+220%
L1 Cache	80 KB	512 KB+540%
L2 Cache	256 KB	512 KB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	MOBILITY/RADEON 9000	RADEON 9250
Upscaling Tech	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	AMD Anti-Lag	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 has 512 MB of VRAM, while the RADEON 9250 carries 256 MB. MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 gives you 100% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 and 64-bit on the RADEON 9250. L2 Cache: 256 KB (MOBILITY/RADEON 9000) vs 512 KB (RADEON 9250) — the RADEON 9250 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	MOBILITY/RADEON 9000	RADEON 9250
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB+100%	0.25 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	256 KB	512 KB+100%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 draws 10W versus the RADEON 9250's 95W — a 161.9% difference. The MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 0W (MOBILITY/RADEON 9000) vs 350W (RADEON 9250). Power connectors: None vs Legacy.

Feature	MOBILITY/RADEON 9000	RADEON 9250
TDP	10W-89%	95W
Recommended PSU	0W-100%	350W
Power Connector	None	Legacy
Length	0mm	—
Height	0mm	—
Slots	0	—
Temp (Load)	70	—
Perf/Watt	0.4	0.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 came in at $0, while the RADEON 9250 launched at $79. On MSRP, MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 was 100+% cheaper ($79 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): Infinity (MOBILITY/RADEON 9000) vs 0.0 (RADEON 9250) — the MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 offers 100+% better value. The newer card here is RADEON 9250 (2015 vs 2010).

Feature	MOBILITY/RADEON 9000	RADEON 9250
MSRP	$0-100%	$79
Performance per Dollar	Infinity	0.0
Codename	Broadway	Amethyst
Release	January 7 2010	September 29 2015
Ranking	#846	#420

Search MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 on Amazon

Search RADEON 9250 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.