Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Radeon R7 250 1GB Crossfire GeForce GTX 460 Point of View TGT Beast 1GB Edition
Cyberpunk 2077 183% 202%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 158% 176%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 150% 167%
Watch Dogs Legion 173% 191%
Godfall 359% 390%
FIFA 21 43% 52%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 150% 167%
Grand Theft Auto VI 298% 325%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 305% 333%
Genshin Impact 183% 202%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the AMD Radeon R7 250 1GB Crossfire are very slightly better than the Nvidia GeForce GTX 460 Point of View TGT Beast 1GB Edition.

The R7 250 has a 145 MHz higher core clock speed but 8 fewer Texture Mapping Units than the GTX 460. The lower TMU count doesn't matter, though, as altogether the R7 250 manages to provide 0.1 GTexel/s better texturing performance. 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 145 MHz higher core clock speed than the GTX 460, but the GTX 460 has 16 more Render Output Units than the R7 250. As a result, the GTX 460 exhibits a 11.4 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 three years more recently than the GTX 460, and so the R7 250 is likely to have far better driver support, meaning it will be much more optimized and ultimately superior to the GTX 460 when running the latest games.

The R7 250 has 1024 MB more video memory than the GTX 460, so is likely to be much better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. This is supported by the fact that the R7 250 also has superior memory performance overall.

The R7 250 has 18.6 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the GTX 460, which means that the memory performance of the R7 250 is slightly better than the GTX 460.

The Radeon R7 250 1GB Crossfire has 768 Shader Processing Units and the GeForce GTX 460 Point of View TGT Beast 1GB Edition has 336. However, the actual shader performance of the R7 250 is 685 and the actual shader performance of the GTX 460 is 575. The R7 250 having 110 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the R7 250 delivers a marginally smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the GTX 460.

The R7 250 transistor size technology is 12 nm (nanometers) smaller than the GTX 460. This means that the R7 250 is expected to run slightly cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the GTX 460.

The Radeon R7 250 1GB Crossfire requires 130 Watts to run and the GeForce GTX 460 Point of View TGT Beast 1GB Edition requires 160 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 500 Watts for the R7 250 and a PSU with at least 450 Watts for the GTX 460. The GTX 460 requires 30 Watts more than the R7 250 to run. The difference is not significant enough for the GTX 460 to have a noticeably larger impact on your yearly electricity bills than the R7 250.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed1000 MHzvs855 MHz
Boost Clock1050 MHzvs-
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 Oland XT (x2)Fermi GF104-300-KB-A1
OC Potential Poor vs Poor
Driver Support Great vs Poor
Release Date08 Oct 2013vs10 Sep 2010
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

Resolution Performance

1366x768
10
green tick vs green tick
10
1600x900
8.1
green tick vs
7.9
1920x1080
6.3
green tick vs
6.1
2560x1440
4.6
green tick vs
4.1
3840x2160
2.9
green tick vs -

GPU Memory

Memory2048 MBvs1024 MB
Memory Speed1150 MHzvs1005 MHz
Memory Bus256 Bitvs256 Bit
Memory TypeGDDR5vsGDDR5
Memory Bandwidth147.2GB/secvs128.6GB/sec
L2 Cache 1024 KB green tick vs 512 KB
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units768vs336
Actual Shader Performance33%vs28%
Technology28nmvs40nm
Texture Mapping Units48vs56
Texture Rate48 GTexel/svs47.9 GTexel/s
Render Output Units16vs32
Pixel Rate16 GPixel/svs27.4 GPixel/s
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)2560x1600vs2560x1600
VGA Connections1vs0
DVI Connections1vs2
HDMI Connections1vs1
DisplayPort Connections0vs0
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power130 Wattsvs160 Watts
Recommended PSU500 Watts & 33 Ampsvs450 Watts & 24 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 i5-760 2.8GHz
Recommended RAM8 GBvs8 GB
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution1920x1080vs1600x900

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.
Overview
GeForce GTX 460 Point of View TGT Beast 1GB Edition is a Special Edition of NVIDIA's Performance GeForce GTX 460, created by Point of View.

Overclock: Central Unit
The Central Unit is now of 855MHz, instead of 675MHz.

Overclock: Memory Clock
The Operating Memory Clock was increased from 900MHz to 1005MHz.

Frame Buffer
Untouched.


Cooling Solution
Untouched.

Performance
Benchmarks Indicate a 17% Performance Boost over the Reference GeForce GTX 460.
Recommended CPU
Possible GPU Upgrades
-
GPU Variants
-
-