CPU
GPU
Radeon X1250
Popular choices:
GeForce PCX 5750
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 GeForce PCX 5750
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon X1250 is significantly newer (2017 vs 2010). The Radeon X1250 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce PCX 5750 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon X1250 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 5.7% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (512 MB vs 128 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce PCX 5750.
| Insight | Radeon X1250 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+5.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-5.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce PCX 5750 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce PCX 5750 holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $49), it costs 69% less, resulting in a 209% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon X1250 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+209%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($49) | ✅More affordable ($15) |
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 X1250 and GeForce PCX 5750
Radeon X1250
The Radeon X1250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 20 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1100 MHz to 1183 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 37 points. Launch price was $79.
GeForce PCX 5750
The GeForce PCX 5750 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 7 2010. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 732 MHz. It has 480 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 219W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 35 points. Launch price was $349.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Radeon X1250 scores 37 versus the GeForce PCX 5750's 35 — the Radeon X1250 leads by 5.7%. The Radeon X1250 is built on GCN 4.0 while the GeForce PCX 5750 uses Fermi 2.0, both on 14 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 512 (Radeon X1250) vs 480 (GeForce PCX 5750). Raw compute: 1.211 TFLOPS (Radeon X1250) vs 1.405 TFLOPS (GeForce PCX 5750).
| Feature | Radeon X1250 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 37+6% | 35 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Fermi 2.0 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 512+7% | 480 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.211 TFLOPS | 1.405 TFLOPS+16% |
| ROPs | 16 | 40+150% |
| TMUs | 32 | 60+88% |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 960 KB+650% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 640 KB+150% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon X1250 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The Radeon X1250 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce PCX 5750 has 128 MB. The Radeon X1250 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Radeon X1250) vs 640 KB (GeForce PCX 5750) — the GeForce PCX 5750 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon X1250 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB+300% | 0.125 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 640 KB+150% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 9.0b (Radeon X1250) vs 9.0a (GeForce PCX 5750). Vulkan: N/A vs N/A. OpenGL: 2.0 vs 1.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon X1250 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 9.0b | 9.0a |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| OpenGL | 2.0+33% | 1.5 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Avivo (Radeon X1250) vs None (GeForce PCX 5750). Decoder: Avivo vs None. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,MPEG-4,WMV9 (Radeon X1250) vs MPEG-2 (GeForce PCX 5750).
| Feature | Radeon X1250 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Avivo | None |
| Decoder | Avivo | None |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,MPEG-4,WMV9 | MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon X1250 draws 50W versus the GeForce PCX 5750's 219W — a 125.7% difference. The Radeon X1250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon X1250) vs 350W (GeForce PCX 5750). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Card length: 0mm vs 168mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70 vs 80.
| Feature | Radeon X1250 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-77% | 219W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | 0mm | 168mm |
| Height | 0mm | 100mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 70-13% | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 0.7+250% | 0.2 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon X1250 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the GeForce PCX 5750 launched at $150 and now averages $15. The GeForce PCX 5750 costs 69.4% less ($34 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.8 (Radeon X1250) vs 2.3 (GeForce PCX 5750) — the GeForce PCX 5750 offers 187.5% better value. The Radeon X1250 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2010).
| Feature | Radeon X1250 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0-100% | $150 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49 | $15-69% |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.8 | 2.3+187% |
| Codename | Lexa | GF110 |
| Release | April 20 2017 | December 7 2010 |
| Ranking | #668 | #497 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon X1250 and GeForce PCX 5750
