Radeon R2 Graphics IGP (APU E2-4000) vs GeForce GTS 250
Summary
Reasons to consider Radeon R2 Graphics IGP (APU E2-4000) |
| 135 watts lower power draw. This might be a strong point if your current power supply is not enough to handle the GeForce GTS 250 . |
| This is a much newer product, it might have better long term support. |
Reasons to consider GeForce GTS 250 |
| Higher theoretical gaming performance, based on specifications. |
| Based on an outdated architecture (Nvidia Tesla), there are no performance optimizations for current games and applications |
| PhysX support, however PhysX performance on newest games may be poor |
HWBench recommends GeForce GTS 250
Based on theoretical specifications.
Core Configuration
| Radeon R2 Graphics IGP (APU E2-4000) | | GeForce GTS 250 | |
|---|
| GPU Name | Mullins () | vs | G92B (G92-428-B1) |
| Fab Process | 28 nm | vs | 55 nm |
| Die Size | 0 mm² | vs | 260 mm² |
| Transistors | unknown | vs | 754 million |
| Shaders | 128 | vs | 128 |
| Compute Units | 2 | vs | 8 |
| Core clock | 700 MHz | vs | 702 MHz |
| ROPs | 4 | vs | 16 |
| TMUs | 8 | vs | 64 |
Memory Configuration
| Radeon R2 Graphics IGP (APU E2-4000) | | GeForce GTS 250 | |
|---|
| Memory Type | System Shared | vs | GDDR3 |
| Bus Width | System Shared | vs | 256 bit |
| Memory Speed | System Shared | vs | 1000 MHz
2000 MHz effective |
| Memory Size | 0 Mb | vs | 1024 Mb |
Additional details
| Radeon R2 Graphics IGP (APU E2-4000) | | GeForce GTS 250 | |
|---|
| TDP | 15 watts | vs | 150 watts |
| Release Date | 27 Feb 2015 | vs | 4 Mar 2009 |
GigaPixels - higher is better
GigaTexels - higher is better
GFLOPs - higher is better