Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Radeon R7 250 1GB Crossfire GeForce GTX 590 EVGA Classified Hydro Copper Edition
Red Dead Redemption 2 168% 34%
Halo: Reach 15% 57%
Cyberpunk 2077 268% 84%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 168% 34%
Doom Eternal 130% 15%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 268% 84%
Grand Theft Auto VI 309% 105%
Dragon Ball Z Kakarot 65% 17%
Star Wars: Jedi - Fallen Order 268% 84%
Need For Speed Heat 168% 34%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia GeForce GTX 590 EVGA Classified Hydro Copper Edition are significantly better than the AMD Radeon R7 250 1GB Crossfire.

The R7 250 has a 370 MHz higher core clock speed than the GTX 590, but the GTX 590 has 80 more Texture Mapping Units than the R7 250. As a result, the GTX 590 exhibits a 32.6 GTexel/s better Texture Fill Rate than the R7 250. This still holds weight but shader performance is generally more relevant, particularly since both of these GPUs support at least DirectX 10.

The R7 250 has a 370 MHz higher core clock speed than the GTX 590, but the GTX 590 has 80 more Render Output Units than the R7 250. As a result, the GTX 590 exhibits a 44.5 GPixel/s better Pixel Fill Rate than the R7 250. However, both GPUs support DirectX 9 or above, and pixeling performance is only really relevant when comparing older cards.

The R7 250 was released over a year more recently than the GTX 590, and so the R7 250 is likely to have better driver support, meaning it will be more optimized for running the latest games when compared to the GTX 590.

The GTX 590 has 1024 MB more video memory than the R7 250, so is likely to be much better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. This is supported by the fact that the GTX 590 also has superior memory performance overall.

The GTX 590 has 184.6 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the R7 250, which means that the memory performance of the GTX 590 is massively better than the R7 250.

The Radeon R7 250 1GB Crossfire has 768 Shader Processing Units and the GeForce GTX 590 EVGA Classified Hydro Copper Edition has 1024. However, the actual shader performance of the R7 250 is 685 and the actual shader performance of the GTX 590 is 1290. The GTX 590 having 605 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the GTX 590 delivers a massively smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the R7 250.

The R7 250 transistor size technology is 12 nm (nanometers) smaller than the GTX 590. This means that the R7 250 is expected to run slightly cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the GTX 590.

The Radeon R7 250 1GB Crossfire requires 130 Watts to run and the GeForce GTX 590 EVGA Classified Hydro Copper Edition requires 365 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 500 Watts for the R7 250 and a PSU with at least 700 Watts for the GTX 590. The GTX 590 requires 235 Watts more than the R7 250 to run. The difference is significant enough that the GTX 590 may have an adverse affect on your yearly electricity bills in comparison to the R7 250.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed1000 MHzvs630 MHz
Boost Clock1050 MHzvs-
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 Oland XT (x2)Fermi GF110-351-A1
OC Potential Poor vs Poor
Driver Support Great vs Poor
Release Date08 Oct 2013vs24 Mar 2011
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

Resolution Performance

1366x768
10
green tick vs -
1600x900
8.1
vs green tick
10
1920x1080
6.3
vs green tick
8.9
2560x1440
4.6
vs green tick
6.6
3840x2160
2.9
green tick vs -

GPU Memory

Memory2048 MBvs3072 MB
Memory Speed1150 MHzvs864 MHz
Memory Bus256 Bitvs768 Bit
Memory TypeGDDR5vsGDDR5
Memory Bandwidth147.2GB/secvs331.8GB/sec
L2 Cache 1024 KB vs green tick 1536 KB
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units768vs1024
Actual Shader Performance33%vs62%
Technology28nmvs40nm
Texture Mapping Units48vs128
Texture Rate48 GTexel/svs80.6 GTexel/s
Render Output Units16vs96
Pixel Rate16 GPixel/svs60.5 GPixel/s
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)2560x1600vs2560x1600
VGA Connections1vs0
DVI Connections1vs2
HDMI Connections1vs1
DisplayPort Connections0vs-
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power130 Wattsvs365 Watts
Recommended PSU500 Watts & 33 Ampsvs700 Watts & 46 Amps

GPU Features

DirectX12.0vs12.0
Shader Model5.0vs5.0
Open GL4.4vs4.5
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUnono
SLI/Crossfirenovsyes
Dedicatedyesvsyes
Comparison

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended ProcessorIntel Core i5-4430 3.0GHzvsIntel Core i7-2700K 4-Core 3.50GHz
Recommended RAM8 GBvs12 GB
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution1920x1080vs2560x1600

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewOverview
Radeon R7 250 1GB Crossfire is a solution of two Radeon R7 250 1GB put together using AMD's Crossfire Technology.

Architecture
It consists of 2 GPUs Codenamed GCN 1.1 Oland XT which, together, offer 768 Shader Processing Units, 48 TMUs and 16 ROPs.

GPU
The central unit runs at 1000MHz and goes up to 1050MHz, in Turbo Mode.

Memory
Each GPU accesses a 1GB frame buffer of fast GDDR5, through a 128-bit memory interface. The size of the frame buffer is adequate. The Memory Clock Operates at 1125MHz.

Power Consumption
Power Consumption lies between 125W and 135W.

Performance
Radeon R7 250 1GB Crossfire Offers slightly more Performance than the Higher Positioned Radeon R7 260 but comes at a higher cost and relies highly in proper Driver Support..

System Suggestions
Radeon R7 250 1GB Crossfire is best suited for resolutions up to and including 1920x1080. We recommend a Performance Processor and 8GB of RAM for Optimal Performance.
GeForce GTX 590 EVGA Classified Hydro Copper is a special edition of the dual-graphics solution GeForce GTX 590.
This edition comes overclocked out of the box in the central unit that went from 608MHz to 630MHz and in the operating memory clock, which is now of 864MHz. Furthermore, it features a new cooling system which keeps the card cool under load.
Benchmarks indicate a 5% performance boost over the reference card and so it proves to be faster than GeForce GTX 680.
Recommended CPU
Possible GPU Upgrades
-
GPU Variants
-
-

Title

Body