CPU
GPU
Radeon HD 8750M
Popular choices:
Radeon R7 250
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 8750M is positioned at rank 144 and the Radeon R7 250 is on rank 107, so the Radeon R7 250 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 8750M
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R7 250
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon HD 8750M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R7 250.
| Insight | Radeon HD 8750M | Radeon R7 250 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| 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 8750M 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon HD 8750M and Radeon R7 250
Radeon HD 8750M
The Radeon HD 8750M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in February 26 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 670 MHz to 775 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,052 points.
Radeon R7 250
The Radeon R7 250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 8 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1050 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 65W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,051 points. Launch price was $89.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon HD 8750M scores 1,052 and the Radeon R7 250 reaches 1,051 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 8750M is built on GCN 1.0 while the Radeon R7 250 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (Radeon HD 8750M) vs 384 (Radeon R7 250). Raw compute: 0.5146 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 8750M) vs 0.8064 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 250). Boost clocks: 775 MHz vs 1050 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon HD 8750M | Radeon R7 250 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,052 | 1,051 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.5146 TFLOPS | 0.8064 TFLOPS+57% |
| Boost Clock | 775 MHz | 1050 MHz+35% |
| ROPs | 8 | 8 |
| TMUs | 24 | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 96 KB | 96 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon HD 8750M | Radeon R7 250 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of video memory. Bus width: System vs 128-bit.
| Feature | Radeon HD 8750M | Radeon R7 250 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | Shared | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | System | Unknown |
| Bus Width | System | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_1) (Radeon HD 8750M) vs 11.1 (Radeon R7 250). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon HD 8750M | Radeon R7 250 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_1)+8% | 11.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 1.0 (Radeon HD 8750M) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon R7 250). Decoder: UVD 3.0 vs UVD 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (Radeon HD 8750M) vs MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,MPEG-4 (Radeon R7 250).
| Feature | Radeon HD 8750M | Radeon R7 250 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 1.0 | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | UVD 3.0 | UVD 4.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 8750M draws 50W versus the Radeon R7 250's 65W — a 26.1% difference. The Radeon HD 8750M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon HD 8750M) vs 300W (Radeon R7 250). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs None. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75.
| Feature | Radeon HD 8750M | Radeon R7 250 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-23% | 65W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 300W-14% |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | None |
| Length | — | 168mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 21.0+30% | 16.2 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon HD 8750M and Radeon R7 250
