
Radeon HD 4250 vs GeForce Go 7600

Radeon HD 4250
Popular choices:

GeForce Go 7600
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 Go 7600 is on rank 76, so the GeForce Go 7600 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 Go 7600
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce Go 7600 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 4.1% 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.
| Insight | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce Go 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-4.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+4.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce Go 7600 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 Go 7600

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 Go 7600
The GeForce Go 7600 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 25 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 980 MHz to 1033 MHz. It has 1152 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 170W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 128 points. Launch price was $249.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon HD 4250 scores 123 and the GeForce Go 7600 reaches 128 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 4250 is built on TeraScale while the GeForce Go 7600 uses Kepler, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 800 (Radeon HD 4250) vs 1,152 (GeForce Go 7600). Raw compute: 1 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 4250) vs 2.378 TFLOPS (GeForce Go 7600).
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce Go 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 123 | 128+4% |
| Architecture | TeraScale | Kepler |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 800 | 1152+44% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1 TFLOPS | 2.378 TFLOPS+138% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 40 | 96+140% |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB+67% | 96 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce Go 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 256 KB (Radeon HD 4250) vs 512 KB (GeForce Go 7600) — the GeForce Go 7600 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce Go 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (Radeon HD 4250) vs 9.0c (GeForce Go 7600). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce Go 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1+12% | 9.0c |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: UVD 2 (Radeon HD 4250) vs No (GeForce Go 7600). Decoder: UVD 2 vs PureVideo.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce Go 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | UVD 2 | No |
| Decoder | UVD 2 | PureVideo |
| Codecs | — | MPEG-2,WMV9,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 4250 draws 110W versus the GeForce Go 7600's 170W — a 42.9% difference. The Radeon HD 4250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon HD 4250) vs 350W (GeForce Go 7600). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs Legacy. Card length: 1mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce Go 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 110W-35% | 170W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | Legacy |
| Length | 1mm | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 1.1+38% | 0.8 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce Go 7600 is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2008).
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce Go 7600 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $50 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10 | — |
| Codename | RV770 | GK104 |
| Release | June 25 2008 | June 25 2013 |
| Ranking | #876 | #450 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















