Radeon HD 4250
VS
GeForce 310M

Radeon HD 4250 vs GeForce 310M

AMD

Radeon HD 4250

2008Core: 625 MHz
VS
NVIDIA

GeForce 310M

2015Core: 549 MHzBoost: 549 MHz

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 Radeon HD 4250 is positioned at rank 299 and the GeForce 310M is on rank 613, so the Radeon HD 4250 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 HD 4250

#1
GeForce RTX 3060 Ti
MSRP: $399|Avg: $280
2949%
#2
GeForce RTX 5060
MSRP: $299|Avg: $299
2833%
#3
Radeon RX 5600 XT
MSRP: $279|Avg: $180
2800%
#4
Radeon RX 9060
MSRP: $249|Avg: $249
2795%
#5
GeForce RTX 5050
MSRP: $249|Avg: $249
2789%
#6
GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
MSRP: $249|Avg: $150
2774%
#7
Arc A580
MSRP: $179|Avg: $179
2739%
#8
Radeon RX 9060 XT
MSRP: $299|Avg: $299
2728%
#9
Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB
MSRP: $299|Avg: $299
2703%
#10
Radeon RX 7600
MSRP: $269|Avg: $250
2696%
#11
Radeon RX 6600
MSRP: $329|Avg: $180
2663%
#12
GeForce RTX 4060
MSRP: $299|Avg: $299
2658%
#13
Arc B570
MSRP: $219|Avg: $219
2610%
#14
Arc B580
MSRP: $249|Avg: $249
2608%
#284
Radeon R5 430 OEM
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13
3252%
#299
Radeon HD 4250
MSRP: $50|Avg: $10
100%
#300
Radeon HD 6310
MSRP: $50|Avg: $50
99%
#301
GeForce GTX 295
MSRP: $499|Avg: $50
98%
#302
Radeon HD 4870 X2
MSRP: $550|Avg: $550
97%
#303
Radeon HD 3850 X2
MSRP: $349|Avg: $349
96%
#305
Radeon HD 4290
MSRP: $60|Avg: $10
96%
#306
Radeon HD 5450
MSRP: $60|Avg: $40
92%
#308
Radeon HD 3850
MSRP: $179|Avg: $179
91%
#309
Radeon HD 4200
MSRP: $50|Avg: $10
91%
#310
Radeon HD 4270
MSRP: $50|Avg: $10
89%
#312
Radeon E6460
MSRP: $150|Avg: $40
88%
#313
Radeon HD 6290
MSRP: $50|Avg: $50
85%
#314
GeForce GTX 280
MSRP: $649|Avg: $649
80%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce 310M

#603
Radeon RX 550X (móvel)
MSRP: $35|Avg: $35
4274%
#605
3875%
#606
3865%
#610
GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50
3514%
#611
Radeon RX 6300
MSRP: $60|Avg: $40
3490%
#613
GeForce 310M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#614
GeForce 205
MSRP: $50|Avg: $15
99%
#615
GeForce 9600 GSO
MSRP: $129|Avg: $25
98%
#616
GeForce 9800 GTX/9800 GTX+
MSRP: $229|Avg: $40
98%
#617
GeForce 9400
MSRP: $59|Avg: $15
98%
#618
GeForce 7350 LE
MSRP: $30|Avg: $10
97%
#620
Mobility Radeon HD 3850
MSRP: $150|Avg: $15
96%
#621
Mobility Radeon HD 4870
MSRP: $299|Avg: $20
95%
#622
GeForce 9800M GT
MSRP: $160|Avg: $5
94%
#623
93%
#624
Radeon HD 8550G + 8670M Dual
MSRP: $250|Avg: $40
91%
#625
GeForce 8300 GS
MSRP: $50|Avg: $50
91%
#626
89%
#627
89%
#628
GeForce 9500M GS
MSRP: $60|Avg: $15
87%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce 310M is significantly newer (2015 vs 2008). The GeForce 310M likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon HD 4250 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce 310M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD 4250.

InsightRadeon HD 4250GeForce 310M
Performance
Lower raw frame rates (-3.3%)
Leading raw performance (+3.3%)
Longevity
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013))
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))
Ecosystem
Supports FSR Upscaling
Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM
❌ Less VRAM capacity
✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency
⚡ Higher Power Consumption
💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit
📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce 310M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

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 Radeon HD 4250 and GeForce 310M

AMD

Radeon HD 4250

The Radeon HD 4250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 25 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 110W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 123 points. Launch price was $199.

NVIDIA

GeForce 310M

The GeForce 310M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 549 MHz to 549 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 127 points.

Graphics Performance

The Radeon HD 4250 scores 123 and the GeForce 310M reaches 127 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 4250 is built on TeraScale while the GeForce 310M uses Maxwell, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 800 (Radeon HD 4250) vs 384 (GeForce 310M). Raw compute: 1 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 4250) vs 0.4216 TFLOPS (GeForce 310M).

FeatureRadeon HD 4250GeForce 310M
G3D Mark Score
123
127+3%
Architecture
TeraScale
Maxwell
Process Node
55 nm
28 nm
Shading Units
800+108%
384
Compute (TFLOPS)
1 TFLOPS+137%
0.4216 TFLOPS
ROPs
16+100%
8
TMUs
40+67%
24
L1 Cache
160 KB
192 KB+20%
L2 Cache
0.25 MB
1 MB+300%

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureRadeon HD 4250GeForce 310M
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)

Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Radeon HD 4250) vs 1 MB (GeForce 310M) — the GeForce 310M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureRadeon HD 4250GeForce 310M
VRAM Capacity
0.5 GB
0.5 GB
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth
Unknown
Unknown
Bus Width
64-bit
128-bit+100%
L2 Cache
0.25 MB
1 MB+300%
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 10.1 (Radeon HD 4250) vs 10.1 (GeForce 310M). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

FeatureRadeon HD 4250GeForce 310M
DirectX
10.1
10.1
Max Displays
2
2
🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: UVD 2 (Radeon HD 4250) vs None (GeForce 310M). Decoder: UVD 2 vs PureVideo VP4.

FeatureRadeon HD 4250GeForce 310M
Encoder
UVD 2
None
Decoder
UVD 2
PureVideo VP4
Codecs
H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon HD 4250 draws 110W versus the GeForce 310M's 33W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce 310M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon HD 4250) vs 350W (GeForce 310M). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs Legacy.

FeatureRadeon HD 4250GeForce 310M
TDP
110W
33W-70%
Recommended PSU
350W
350W
Power Connector
1x 6-pin
Legacy
Length
1mm
Slots
0-100%
1
Temp (Load)
80°C
Perf/Watt
1.1
3.8+245%
💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce 310M is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2008).

FeatureRadeon HD 4250GeForce 310M
MSRP
$50
Avg Price (30d)
$10
Codename
RV770
GM108
Release
June 25 2008
March 13 2015
Ranking
#876
#880