Radeon R7 250X vs Quadro K620
Radeon R7 250X
Popular choices:
Quadro K620
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K620
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R7 250X is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.5% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro K620.
| Insight | Radeon R7 250X | Quadro K620 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.5%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R7 250X offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R7 250X holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $30), it costs 0% less, resulting in a 2.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R7 250X | Quadro K620 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+2.5%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 R7 250X and Quadro K620
Radeon R7 250X
The Radeon R7 250X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in February 13 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 80W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,269 points. Launch price was $99.
Quadro K620
The Quadro K620 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 22 2014. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1058 MHz to 1124 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 45W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,213 points. Launch price was $189.89.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R7 250X scores 2,269 and the Quadro K620 reaches 2,213 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R7 250X is built on GCN 1.0 while the Quadro K620 uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 640 (Radeon R7 250X) vs 384 (Quadro K620). Raw compute: 1.216 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 250X) vs 0.8632 TFLOPS (Quadro K620). Boost clocks: 1000 MHz vs 1124 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon R7 250X | Quadro K620 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,269+3% | 2,213 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 640+67% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.216 TFLOPS+41% | 0.8632 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1000 MHz | 1124 MHz+12% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 40+67% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB | 192 KB+20% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R7 250X | Quadro K620 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Radeon R7 250X) vs 2 MB (Quadro K620) — the Quadro K620 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R7 250X | Quadro K620 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R7 250X draws 80W versus the Quadro K620's 45W — a 56% difference. The Quadro K620 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 400W (Radeon R7 250X) vs 350W (Quadro K620). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon R7 250X | Quadro K620 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 80W | 45W-44% |
| Recommended PSU | 400W | 350W-13% |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 210mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 28.4 | 49.2+73% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R7 250X launched at $99 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the Quadro K620 launched at $150 and now averages $30. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 75.6 (Radeon R7 250X) vs 73.8 (Quadro K620) — the Radeon R7 250X offers 2.4% better value.
| Feature | Radeon R7 250X | Quadro K620 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $99-34% | $150 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30 | $30 |
| Performance per Dollar | 75.6+2% | 73.8 |
| Codename | Cape Verde | GM107 |
| Release | February 13 2014 | July 22 2014 |
| Ranking | #655 | #660 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R7 250X and Quadro K620
