Radeon HD 4250 vs GeForce 9300M GS
Radeon HD 4250
Popular choices:
GeForce 9300M GS
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 Radeon HD 4250 is positioned at rank 299 and the GeForce 9300M GS is on rank 686, so the Radeon HD 4250 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 4250
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9300M GS
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 9300M GS is significantly newer (2015 vs 2008). The GeForce 9300M GS 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 Radeon HD 4250 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 4.2% 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 GeForce 9300M GS.
| Insight | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce 9300M GS |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+4.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-4.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon HD 4250 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon HD 4250 holds the technical lead. Priced at $10 (vs $10), it costs 0% less, resulting in a 4.2% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce 9300M GS |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+4.2%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 9300M GS
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.
GeForce 9300M GS
The GeForce 9300M GS 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: 118 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon HD 4250 scores 123 and the GeForce 9300M GS reaches 118 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 4250 is built on TeraScale while the GeForce 9300M GS uses Maxwell, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 800 (Radeon HD 4250) vs 384 (GeForce 9300M GS). Raw compute: 1 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 4250) vs 0.4216 TFLOPS (GeForce 9300M GS).
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce 9300M GS |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 123+4% | 118 |
| 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)
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce 9300M GS |
|---|---|---|
| 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 HD 4250 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce 9300M GS has 256 MB. The Radeon HD 4250 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Radeon HD 4250) vs 1 MB (GeForce 9300M GS) — the GeForce 9300M GS has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce 9300M GS |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB+100% | 0.25 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 10.0 (GeForce 9300M GS). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 1.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce 9300M GS |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 10.0 |
| Max Displays | 2+100% | 1 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: UVD 2 (Radeon HD 4250) vs No (GeForce 9300M GS). Decoder: UVD 2 vs PureVideo HD VP3.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce 9300M GS |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | UVD 2 | No |
| Decoder | UVD 2 | PureVideo HD VP3 |
| Codecs | — | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 4250 draws 110W versus the GeForce 9300M GS's 33W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce 9300M GS is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon HD 4250) vs 350W (GeForce 9300M GS). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs Legacy. Card length: 1mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce 9300M GS |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 110W | 33W-70% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | Legacy |
| Length | 1mm | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 1.1 | 3.6+227% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon HD 4250 launched at $50 MSRP and currently averages $10, while the GeForce 9300M GS launched at $100 and now averages $10. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 12.3 (Radeon HD 4250) vs 11.8 (GeForce 9300M GS) — the Radeon HD 4250 offers 4.2% better value. The GeForce 9300M GS is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2008).
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce 9300M GS |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $50-50% | $100 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10 | $10 |
| Performance per Dollar | 12.3+4% | 11.8 |
| Codename | RV770 | GM108 |
| Release | June 25 2008 | March 13 2015 |
| Ranking | #876 | #880 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon HD 4250 and GeForce 9300M GS
