Radeon HD 4250 vs Quadro FX 380M
Radeon HD 4250
Popular choices:
Quadro FX 380M
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 Quadro FX 380M is on rank 161, so the Quadro FX 380M 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 Quadro FX 380M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon HD 4250 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.7% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 380M.
| Insight | Radeon HD 4250 | Quadro FX 380M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| 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 Radeon HD 4250 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 Quadro FX 380M
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.
Quadro FX 380M
The Quadro FX 380M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 610 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 189W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 121 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon HD 4250 scores 123 and the Quadro FX 380M reaches 121 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 4250 is built on TeraScale while the Quadro FX 380M uses Tesla 2.0, both on a 55 nm process. Shader units: 800 (Radeon HD 4250) vs 240 (Quadro FX 380M). Raw compute: 1 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 4250) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 380M).
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | Quadro FX 380M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 123+2% | 121 |
| Architecture | TeraScale | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 800+233% | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1 TFLOPS+61% | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 40 | 80+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | Quadro FX 380M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | Quadro FX 380M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (Radeon HD 4250) vs 11.1 (FL10_1) (Quadro FX 380M). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | Quadro FX 380M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 11.1 (FL10_1)+10% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: UVD 2 (Radeon HD 4250) vs VP4 (Quadro FX 380M). Decoder: UVD 2 vs VP4.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | Quadro FX 380M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | UVD 2 | VP4 |
| Decoder | UVD 2 | VP4 |
| Codecs | — | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 4250 draws 110W versus the Quadro FX 380M's 189W — a 52.8% difference. The Radeon HD 4250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon HD 4250) vs 350W (Quadro FX 380M). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 1mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4250 | Quadro FX 380M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 110W-42% | 189W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 1mm | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 1.1+83% | 0.6 |
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 Quadro FX 380M
