Contents:HighlightsSummaryGaming PerformanceBenchmark PerformanceTechnical SpecsRelated ComparisonsRelated GPUs
Performance
Radeon R9 Nano273% better
17,28217% of 104,598
GeForce MX250
4,6334% of 104,598
The Radeon R9 Nano has 273% better performance than the GeForce MX250 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
Performance per dollar
Radeon R9 Nano
26.6316% of 161.45
GeForce MX250
No data available
The Radeon R9 Nano has 16% of the performance per dollar compared to the leader for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark: AMD Radeon RX 7600.
Shop Radeon R9 Nano
Shop GeForce MX250
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Summary
#
About the AMD Radeon R9 Nano GPU
The AMD Radeon R9 Nano is an end-of-life desktop graphics card that released in Q3 2015 with a MSRP of $649. It is built on the GCN 3.0 GPU microarchitecture (codename Fiji) and is manufactured on a 28 nm process.
Memory
The R9 Nano has 4 GB of HBM memory, with a 500 MHz memory clock and a 4,096 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 512 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.
Cores and Clock Speeds
The R9 Nano includes 4,096 stream processors (SPs), the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 1,000 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 256 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 64 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.
Compatibility & Power Consumption
The R9 Nano occupies 2 PCIe expansion slots. It supports HDMI 1.4a, DisplayPort 1.2 display connections. AMD recommends a power supply of at least 450 W to handle the GPU's thermal design power (TDP) of 175 W.
Benchmark Performance & Value
The R9 Nano has the 133rd best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 16.52% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090. Its 17,282 score and $649 launch price (MSRP) gives it a performance per dollar of 26.63. This is the 82nd best in value for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
About the NVIDIA GeForce MX250 GPU
The NVIDIA GeForce MX250 is an end-of-life mobile graphics card that released in Q1 2019. It is built on the Pascal GPU microarchitecture (codename GP108B) and is manufactured on a 14 nm process.
Memory
The MX250 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, with a 1,502 MHz memory clock and a 64 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 48.06 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.
Cores and Clock Speeds
The MX250 includes 384 CUDA cores, the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 937 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 1,038 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 24 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 16 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.
Compatibility & Power Consumption
The GPU has a thermal design power (TDP) of 10 W. A power supply not strong enough to handle this might result in system crashes and potentially damage your hardware.
Benchmark Performance
The MX250 has the 259th best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 4.43% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.
General Info
General overview of the GPU, including details like its manufacturer, release date, launch price, and current production status.
| Info | Radeon R9 Nano | GeForce MX250 |
|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | AMD | NVIDIA |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Pascal |
| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |
| Release Date | Q3 2015 | Q1 2019 |
| Launch Price (MSRP) | $649 | -- |
| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |
| Shop | Check Price | Check Price |
Gaming Performance
#
Select a game to compare FPS metrics
Sons of the Forest
Ready or Not
The Finals
Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora
EA Sports WRC
Total War: PHARAOH
Assassin's Creed Mirage
FPS Benchmarks
This table showcases the average frame rate (FPS) achieved both GPUs in at various resolutions. Frame rate is a crucial indicator of how smoothly the GPU can run the game. A higher FPS generally translates to a smoother gameplay experience.
- Frames Per Second
Sons of the Forest | Radeon R9 Nano | GeForce MX250 |
|---|---|---|
| Low - 1080p | -- | 20 FPS |
| Medium - 1080p | -- | 11 FPS |
| High - 1080p | -- | -- |
| Ultra - 1080p | -- | -- |
| QHD - 1440p | -- | -- |
| 4K UHD - 2160p | -- | -- |
FPS Source: Notebookcheck
Compare Frames Per Second (FPS)
The average frame rate (FPS) in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, higher FPS results in a smoother gameplay experience.
Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon R9 Nano orGeForce MX250
| GPU | Frames Per Second | |
|---|---|---|
| GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile | 22.2 | +107% |
| Radeon RX 560X Mobile | 21.5 | +101% |
| Radeon 660M | 16.7 | +56% |
| GeForce MX350 | 13.8 | +29% |
| GeForce MX250 | 10.7 | |
| Radeon RX 550 Mobile | 8.73 | -18% |
Compare Cost Per Frame
The average cost per frame in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. Generally, a lower cost per frame implies better value for your money.
Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon R9 Nano orGeForce MX250
| GPU | Cost Per Frame | |
|---|---|---|
| Our database does not have enough data to compare the FPS per dollar with other GPUs. | ||
Benchmark Performance
#
Performance
Radeon R9 Nano273% better
17,28217% of 104,598
GeForce MX250
4,6334% of 104,598
The Radeon R9 Nano has 273% better performance than the GeForce MX250 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
The Radeon R9 Nano is ranked 133rd with a score of 17,282, and the GeForce MX250 is ranked 259th with a score of 4,633.
Performance per dollar
Radeon R9 Nano
26.6316% of 161.45
GeForce MX250
No data available
The Radeon R9 Nano has 41% of the performance per dollar compared to the leader for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.
Radeon R9 Nano's 26.63 performance per dollar ranks it 82nd among the other benchmarked GPUs in our database.
Relative Performance
The average score in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon R9 Nano or
| GPU | Benchmark Performance | |
|---|---|---|
| Radeon R9 FURY | 17,543 | +2% |
| GeForce GTX 1060 (6 GB) | 17,401 | +1% |
| Radeon R9 Nano | 17,282 | |
| Radeon R9 290X | 16,167.5 | -6% |
| GeForce GTX 970 | 16,033 | -7% |
| Radeon R9 M280X | 4,698 | -73% |
| Radeon RX 540 Mobile | 4,646 | -73% |
| GeForce MX250 | 4,633 | -73% |
| Radeon RX 550 Mobile | 4,559 | -74% |
| Radeon Pro 450 | 4,502 | -74% |
Relative Value For Money
The average performance per dollar in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. A higher score implies a better value for your money.
Choose Baseline GPU:Radeon R9 Nano orGeForce MX250
| GPU | Performance Per Dollar | |
|---|---|---|
| GeForce GTX 980 Ti | 35.53 | +33% |
| GeForce GTX 980 | 32.07 | +20% |
| Radeon R9 FURY | 31.95 | +20% |
| Radeon R9 290X | 29.45 | +11% |
| GeForce GTX 660 Ti | 28.14 | +6% |
| Radeon R9 Nano | 26.63 | |
| GeForce GTX 780 Ti | 22.34 | -16% |
| GeForce GTX 680 | 20.47 | -23% |
| GeForce GTX 590 | 13.11 | -51% |
Benchmark Scores
This table showcases the average performance scores achieved by both GPUs across industry-standard benchmark tests. These scores provide a valuable insight into overall performance. Powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
- Popular
| Benchmark | Radeon R9 Nano | GeForce MX250 |
|---|---|---|
| 3DMark Time Spy Graphics | 4,511 (+308.98%) | 1,103 |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 4,556 (+273.29%) | 1,220.5 |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics | 81,374 (+277.69%) | 21,545 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics | 14,362 (+292.4%) | 3,660 |
| 3DMark 11 Performance Score | 14,793 (+205.01%) | 4,850 |
| Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit | -- | 99.6 |
| PassMark G3D Mark | -- | 2,412 |
| PassMark G2D Mark | -- | 239 |
| Unigine Heaven 3.0 DirectX 11 | -- | 43.6 |
| Unigine Heaven 3.0 OpenGL | -- | 43.7 |
Benchmarks Source: Notebookcheck
Technical Specs
#
Graphics Processor
General information about the graphics processing unit like their architecture, manufacturing process size, and transistor count. Newer GPU architectures generally bring efficiency improvements and may introduce technologies that enhance graphical capabilities.
| Spec | Radeon R9 Nano | GeForce MX250 |
|---|---|---|
| Codename | Fiji | GP108B |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Pascal |
| Process Size | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Transistors | 8,900 million | 1,800 million |
Memory Details
Memory specifications like their capacity, bandwidth, and clock speeds. GPU memory stores graphics data like frames, textures, and shadows which helps display rendered images. These specs are crucial for graphics-intense applications like gaming and 3D modeling.
| Spec | Radeon R9 Nano | GeForce MX250 |
|---|---|---|
| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | HBM | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 512 Gb/s | 48.06 Gb/s |
| Memory Clock | 500 MHz | 1,502 MHz |
| Memory Interface | 4,096 bit | 64 bit |
| L1 Cache | 16 KB | 48 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 512 KB |
Board Compatibility
Compatibility information like their slot size, bus interface, power consumption, and display support. These specs are useful for verifying compatibility with your motherboard, power supply, and monitor.
| Spec | Radeon R9 Nano | GeForce MX250 |
|---|---|---|
| Slots | 2 slots | -- |
| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x4 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 175 W | 10 W |
| Suggested PSU | 450 W | -- |
| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | -- |
| Outputs | HDMI 1.4a, DisplayPort 1.2 | Device Dependent |
Cores & Clock Speeds
Processing power information like its cores and clock speed. These specs impact how fast they can process graphics. Each type of core or component serves a specific computational purpose.
| Spec | Radeon R9 Nano | GeForce MX250 |
|---|---|---|
| Stream Processors (SP) | 4,096 | -- |
| CUDA Cores | -- | 384 |
| Compute Units (CU) | 64 | -- |
| Stream Multiprocessors (SM) | -- | 3 |
| Texture Mapping Units (TMU) | 256 | 24 |
| Render Output Units (ROP) | 64 | 16 |
| Core Clock Speed | 1,000 MHz | 937 MHz |
| Core Clock Speed (Boost) | -- | 1,038 MHz |
Theoretical Performance
Theoretical performance numbers derived from the raw specifications of the different components like core count and clock speeds. While these provide a glimpse into peak processing power, they do not represent real-world performance.
| Spec | Radeon R9 Nano | GeForce MX250 |
|---|---|---|
| Pixel Fill Rate | 64 GPixel/s | 16.61 GPixel/s |
| Texture Fill Rate | 256 GTexel/s | 24.91 GTexel/s |
| FP32 Performance | 8.19 TFLOPS | 797.2 GFLOPS |
| FP64 Performance | 512 GFLOPS | 24.91 GFLOPS |
API Support
Graphics API versions supported by these graphics cards. APIs evolve over time, introducing new features and functionalities. Older GPUs may not support recent versions.
| Spec | Radeon R9 Nano | GeForce MX250 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 6.8 |
Check out these comparisons for similar GPUs:
Looking for alternatives? Check out these similar GPUs:
* Performance rating, performance per dollar, and rankings are based on the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark and MSRP.