RADEON 9250 vs GeForce3 Ti 200

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 RADEON 9250 is positioned at rank 748 and the GeForce3 Ti 200 is on rank 382, so the GeForce3 Ti 200 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar RADEON 9250

#738

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

271425%

#740

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

246050%

#741

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

245400%

#745

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

223150%

#746

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

221625%

#748

RADEON 9250

MSRP: $79|Avg: $25

100%

#749

RADEON 9200

MSRP: $99|Avg: $25

100%

#750

GeForce2 MX/MX 400

MSRP: $129|Avg: $15

75%

#751

GeForce4 MX 440

MSRP: $149|Avg: $49

75%

#752

RADEON 7200

MSRP: $99|Avg: $45

75%

#753

GeForce 256

MSRP: $199|Avg: $20

75%

#754

GeForce2 MX

MSRP: $129|Avg: $49

50%

#755

GeForce3

MSRP: $499|Avg: $49

25%

#756

GeForce4 440

MSRP: $469|Avg: $49

25%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce3 Ti 200

#1

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

241800%

#2

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

232300%

#3

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

229600%

#4

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

229200%

#5

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

228733%

#6

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

227433%

#7

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

224567%

#8

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

223733%

#9

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

221667%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

221067%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

218400%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

217933%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

214000%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

213867%

#367

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

266667%

#382

GeForce3 Ti 200

MSRP: $149|Avg: $49

100%

#383

GeForce4 Ti 4200

MSRP: $199|Avg: $5

100%

#384

GeForce4 Ti 4400

MSRP: $299|Avg: $49

67%

#385

GeForce4 MX 460

MSRP: $179|Avg: $15

67%

#386

GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE

MSRP: $299|Avg: $30

67%

#387

GeForce4 Ti 4800

MSRP: $399|Avg: $40

67%

#388

GeForce4 Ti 4600

MSRP: $399|Avg: $40

67%

#389

RADEON 7500

MSRP: $199|Avg: $50

67%

#390

GeForce3 Ti 500

MSRP: $349|Avg: $49

33%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce3 Ti 200 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce3 Ti 200 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The RADEON 9250 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce3 Ti 200 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 33.3% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (512 MB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the RADEON 9250.

Insight	RADEON 9250	GeForce3 Ti 200
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-33.3%)	✅Leading raw performance (+33.3%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Turing (2018−2022))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The RADEON 9250 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $25 versus $49 for the GeForce3 Ti 200, it costs 49% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 47% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	RADEON 9250	GeForce3 Ti 200
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+47%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($25)	⚠️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.

RADEON 9250 Benchmark Check

GeForce3 Ti 200 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of RADEON 9250 and GeForce3 Ti 200

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.

GeForce3 Ti 200

The GeForce3 Ti 200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 20 2018. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1515 MHz to 1710 MHz. It has 2944 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 215W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4 points. Launch price was $699.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the RADEON 9250 scores 3 versus the GeForce3 Ti 200's 4 — the GeForce3 Ti 200 leads by 33.3%. The RADEON 9250 is built on GCN 3.0 while the GeForce3 Ti 200 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (RADEON 9250) vs 2,944 (GeForce3 Ti 200). Raw compute: 4.096 TFLOPS (RADEON 9250) vs 10.07 TFLOPS (GeForce3 Ti 200). Boost clocks: 1000 MHz vs 1710 MHz.

Feature	RADEON 9250	GeForce3 Ti 200
G3D Mark Score	3	4+33%
Architecture	GCN 3.0	Turing
Process Node	28 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	2048	2944+44%
Compute (TFLOPS)	4.096 TFLOPS	10.07 TFLOPS+146%
Boost Clock	1000 MHz	1710 MHz+71%
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	128	184+44%
L1 Cache	0.5 MB	2.9 MB+480%
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	4 MB+700%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	RADEON 9250	GeForce3 Ti 200
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	AMD Anti-Lag	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The RADEON 9250 comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce3 Ti 200 has 512 MB. The GeForce3 Ti 200 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (RADEON 9250) vs 4 MB (GeForce3 Ti 200) — the GeForce3 Ti 200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	RADEON 9250	GeForce3 Ti 200
VRAM Capacity	0.25 GB	0.5 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	4 MB+700%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The RADEON 9250 draws 95W versus the GeForce3 Ti 200's 215W — a 77.4% difference. The RADEON 9250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (RADEON 9250) vs 350W (GeForce3 Ti 200). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	RADEON 9250	GeForce3 Ti 200
TDP	95W-56%	215W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	Legacy	PCIe-powered
Length	—	183mm
Height	—	100mm
Slots	—	1
Temp (Load)	—	60
Perf/Watt	0.0	0.0

💰

Value Analysis

The RADEON 9250 launched at $79 MSRP and currently averages $25, while the GeForce3 Ti 200 launched at $149 and now averages $49. The RADEON 9250 costs 49% less ($24 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.1 (RADEON 9250) vs 0.1 (GeForce3 Ti 200) — the GeForce3 Ti 200 offers 0% better value. The GeForce3 Ti 200 is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2015).