Radeon HD 4850 X2 vs FireStream 9250
Radeon HD 4850 X2
Popular choices:
FireStream 9250
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 4850 X2 is positioned at rank 291 and the FireStream 9250 is on rank 340, so the Radeon HD 4850 X2 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 4850 X2
Performance Per Dollar FireStream 9250
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FireStream 9250 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD 4850 X2.
| Insight | Radeon HD 4850 X2 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon HD 4850 X2 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon HD 4850 X2 holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $49), it costs 18% less, resulting in a 19% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon HD 4850 X2 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+19%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($40) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($49) |
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 4850 X2 and FireStream 9250
Radeon HD 4850 X2
The Radeon HD 4850 X2 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 7 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 800 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,132 points. Launch price was $420.
FireStream 9250
The FireStream 9250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 16 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,165 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon HD 4850 X2 scores 1,132 and the FireStream 9250 reaches 1,165 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 4850 X2 is built on TeraScale while the FireStream 9250 uses TeraScale, both on a 55 nm process. Shader units: 800 (Radeon HD 4850 X2) vs 800 (FireStream 9250). Raw compute: 1 TFLOPS ×2 (Radeon HD 4850 X2) vs 1 TFLOPS (FireStream 9250).
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 X2 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,132 | 1,165+3% |
| Architecture | TeraScale | TeraScale |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 800 ×2 | 800 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1 TFLOPS ×2 | 1 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 ×2 | 16 |
| TMUs | 40 ×2 | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB | 160 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 X2 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 1 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 X2 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 1 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 4850 X2) vs 10.1 (FireStream 9250). Vulkan: N/A vs N/A. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 1.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 X2 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 10.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 4+300% | 1 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (Radeon HD 4850 X2) vs None (FireStream 9250). Decoder: UVD 2.2 vs UVD 2.0. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 (Radeon HD 4850 X2) vs H.264,VC-1 (FireStream 9250).
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 X2 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | UVD 2.2 | UVD 2.0 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 | H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 4850 X2 draws 250W versus the FireStream 9250's 150W — a 50% difference. The FireStream 9250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Radeon HD 4850 X2) vs 350W (FireStream 9250). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 234mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 95 vs Unknown.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 X2 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 150W-40% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 350W-30% |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | 234mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 95 | Unknown-100% |
| Perf/Watt | 4.5 | 7.8+73% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon HD 4850 X2 launched at $399 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the FireStream 9250 launched at $999 and now averages $49. The Radeon HD 4850 X2 costs 18.4% less ($9 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 28.3 (Radeon HD 4850 X2) vs 23.8 (FireStream 9250) — the Radeon HD 4850 X2 offers 18.9% better value.
| Feature | Radeon HD 4850 X2 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $399-60% | $999 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40-18% | $49 |
| Performance per Dollar | 28.3+19% | 23.8 |
| Codename | R700 | RV770 |
| Release | November 7 2008 | June 16 2008 |
| Ranking | #848 | #840 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon HD 4850 X2 and FireStream 9250
