Radeon HD 4250 vs GeForce GTX 1060
Radeon HD 4250
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1060
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. The Radeon HD 4250 is positioned at rank #299 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 4250
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1060 is significantly newer (2016 vs 2008). The GeForce GTX 1060 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 GTX 1060 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 8082.1% higher G3D Mark score and 1100% more VRAM (6 GB vs 512 MB). 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 GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-8082.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+8082.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+1100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1060 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 1060 holds the technical lead. Priced at $10 (vs $60), it costs 83% less, resulting in a 1263.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1263.7%) |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($10) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($60) |
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 GTX 1060
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 GTX 1060
The GeForce GTX 1060 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2016. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1607 MHz to 1733 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 180W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,064 points. Launch price was $599.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Radeon HD 4250 scores 123 versus the GeForce GTX 1060's 10,064 — the GeForce GTX 1060 leads by 8082.1%. The Radeon HD 4250 is built on TeraScale while the GeForce GTX 1060 uses Pascal, both on 55 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 800 (Radeon HD 4250) vs 2,560 (GeForce GTX 1060). Raw compute: 1 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 4250) vs 8.873 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1060).
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 123 | 10,064+8082% |
| Architecture | TeraScale | Pascal |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 800 | 2560+220% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1 TFLOPS | 8.873 TFLOPS+787% |
| ROPs | 16 | 64+300% |
| TMUs | 40 | 160+300% |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB | 960 KB+500% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| 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 GTX 1060 has 6 GB. The GeForce GTX 1060 offers 1100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Radeon HD 4250) vs 2 MB (GeForce GTX 1060) — the GeForce GTX 1060 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 6 GB+1100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | 192 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 192-bit+200% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (Radeon HD 4250) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1060). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 12+19% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: UVD 2 (Radeon HD 4250) vs NVENC (Pascal) (GeForce GTX 1060). Decoder: UVD 2 vs NVDEC (Pascal).
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | UVD 2 | NVENC (Pascal) |
| Decoder | UVD 2 | NVDEC (Pascal) |
| Codecs | — | H.264,H.265/HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 4250 draws 110W versus the GeForce GTX 1060's 180W — a 48.3% difference. The Radeon HD 4250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon HD 4250) vs 400W (GeForce GTX 1060). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs 6-pin. Card length: 1mm vs 173mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 110W-39% | 180W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-13% | 400W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | 6-pin |
| Length | 1mm | 173mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Perf/Watt | 1.1 | 55.9+4982% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon HD 4250 launched at $50 MSRP and currently averages $10, while the GeForce GTX 1060 launched at $249 and now averages $60. The Radeon HD 4250 costs 83.3% less ($50 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 12.3 (Radeon HD 4250) vs 167.7 (GeForce GTX 1060) — the GeForce GTX 1060 offers 1263.4% better value. The GeForce GTX 1060 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2008).
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $50-80% | $249 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-83% | $60 |
| Performance per Dollar | 12.3 | 167.7+1263% |
| Codename | RV770 | GP104 |
| Release | June 25 2008 | May 27 2016 |
| Ranking | #876 | #137 |
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 GTX 1060
