AMD Radeon HD 6950 vs AMD Radeon R7 250 Comparison

FAQ

**Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

**A: The AMD Radeon R7 7 250 leads the AMD Radeon HD 6950 in the recorded data. The R7 250 scores 7557, while the HD 6950 scores 6210, resulting in a 21.7% difference in favor of the R7 250.

**Q: How does the AMD Radeon R7 250 compare to the Intel Arc A310 in terms of average benchmark score?

**A: The AMD Radeon R7 250 is essentially tied with the Intel Arc A310. The R7 250's average score is 7557, and the Intel Arc A310 averages 7550, showing a delta of 0.1% difference between them.

Q: What is the difference in transistor density between the AMD Radeon R7 250 and the AMD Radeon HD 6950?

**A: The AMD Radeon R7 250 has a transistor density of 12.2M / mm², while the AMD Radeon HD 6950 has 6.8M / mm². The R7 250's higher density comes from packing 1,500 million transistors on a 28 nm process node, while the HD 6950 uses 2,640 million transistors on a 40 nm process node.

**Q: Which GPU supports a newer PCIe interface version?

**A: The AMD Radeon R7 250 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, whereas the AMD Radeon HD 6950 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The R7 250's PCIe 3.0 interface offers a more recent bus interface compared to the HD 6950's PCIe 2.0.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does the AMD Radeon HD 6950 provide compared to the AMD Radeon R7 250?

**A: The AMD Radeon HD 6950 offers significantly more memory bandwidth at 160.0 GB/s, using a 256 bit bus width. In contrast, the AMD Radeon R7 7 250 has 28.80 GB/s bandwidth with a 128 bit bus width, using DDR3 memory compared to the HD 6950's GDDR5 type.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R7 250 and the AMD Radeon HD 6950 are built on fundamentally different graphics architectures. The R7 250 is based on the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Cape Verde chip, part of the Volcanic Islands (R7 200) generation. The HD 6950, however, is based on the older TeraScale 3 architecture with the Cayman chip, belonging to the Northern Islands (HD 6900) generation. This difference in architecture generation is a key factor in their performance characteristics and feature support.

Manufacturing technology also differs considerably. The R7 250 is produced on TSMC's 28 nm process, resulting in a die size of 123 mm². The HD 6950 is manufactured on TSMC's 40 nm process with a much larger die size of 389 mm². The transistor count is also distinct, with the R7 250 having 1,500 million transistors, where the HD 6950 houses 2,640 million. This leads to transistor density numbers of 12.1 million per square millimeter for the R7 250 and 6.8 million per square millimeter for the HD 6950.

Feature sets and API support highlight the architectural progression. The R7 250 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The HD 6950 supports DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4 and has no Vulkan support. The R7 250's architecture also provides a higher pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 29.60 GTexel/s, but these are lower than the HD 6950's rates of 25.60 GPixel/s and 70.40 GTexel/s. The R7 250 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the HD 6950 is configured with 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 250 demonstrates a clear advantage in the OpenCL benchmark, which often serves as a proxy for general-purpose compute performance and certain workloads. The recorded data shows the R7 250 scores 7557, outpacing the HD 6950's 6210. This result indicates the R7 250 is more efficient at compute tasks in this specific test, likely due to its newer GCN architecture and higher transistor density. The R7 250's lower power draw of 55 W and smaller footprint make it a more suitable card for systems where space, power, and cooling are at a premium. Its single-slot design and lack of external power connectors allow for installation in smaller form factor systems that cannot accommodate larger, more power-hungry cards.

The AMD Radeon HD 6950, despite losing the compute benchmark, has a significant advantage in raw rasterization throughput, a key factor for traditional gaming workloads. The data shows it possesses a much larger memory subsystem with a bus width of 256 bit and memory speed that leads to 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is crucial for high-resolution textures. Its higher pixel rate of 25.60 GPixel/s and texture rate of 70.40 GTexel/s, along with double the shading units at 1408, suggest it can handle the rendering of complex scenes at higher detail levels. In scenarios that rely heavily on these classic graphics pipeline metrics, such as older DirectX 11 titles, the HD 6950 is the more powerful performer. It also has a larger memory capacity of 2 GB compared to the R7 250's 1024 MB, which can be a benefit for games requiring more video memory.

Specification Differences

• Memory: The R7 250 has 1024 MB of DDR3 memory, while the HD 6950 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory.
• Memory Bus Width: The R7 250 has a 128-bit bus, while the HD 6950 has a 256-bit bus.
• Memory Bandwidth: The R7 250 has 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, while the HD 6950 has 160.0 GB/s.
• Memory Clock: The R7 250 has a memory clock of 1800 Mbps effective, while the HD 6950 has a memory clock of 5 Gbps effective.
• Shading Units: The R7 250 has 512 shading units, while the HD 6950 has 1408 shading units.
• TMUs and ROPs: The R7 250 has 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs, while the HD 6950 has 88 TMUs and 32 ROPs.
• Pixel Rate: The R7 250 has a pixel rate of 14.20 GPixel/s, while the HD 6950 has 25.60 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: The R7 250 has a texture rate of 29.60 GTexel/s, while the HD 6950 has 70.40 GTexel/s.
• FP32 Performance: The R7 250 has 947.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the HD 6950 has 2.253 TFLOPS.
• TDP: The R7 250 has a TDP of 55 W, while the HD 6950 has a TDP of 200 W.
• Power Connectors: The R7 250 requires no power connectors, while the HD 6950 requires 2x 6-pin connectors.
• Suggested PSU: The R7 250 has a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the HD 6950 has a suggested PSU of 550 W.
• Slot Width: The R7 250 is a single-slot card, while the HD 6950 is a dual-slot card.
• Dimensions: The R7 250 is 168 mm long, while the HD 6950 is 286 mm long, 126 mm high, and 42 mm wide.
• Bus Interface: The R7 250 has a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the HD 6950 has a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
• Display Outputs: The R7 250 has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The HD 6950 has 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2.
• API Support: The R7 250 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The HD 6950 supports DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4, with no Vulkan support.
• Release Date: The R7 250 was released on 2013-10-07, while the HD 6950 was released on 2010-12-13.
• Process Node: The R7 250 is built on a 28 nm process, while the HD 6950 is built on a 40 nm process.
• Die Size: The R7 250 has a die size of 123 mm², while the HD 6950 has a die size of 389 mm².
• Transistor Density: The R7 250 has a density of 12.2M / mm², while the HD 6950 has 6.8M / mm².

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single head-to-head benchmark result between these two cards in the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this comparison, the AMD Radeon R7 250 achieves a score of 7557, while the AMD Radeon HD 6950 scores 6210. This gives the R7 250 a winning margin of 21.7%. The R7 250's lead in this compute benchmark is substantial, indicating a significant performance advantage in the workload tested.

Placing the scores in the context of their nearest rivals shows how each card is positioned. The R7 250's score of 7557 is closely surrounded by similar performers. It is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Arc A310 (7550), 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580), 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7472), and 1.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447). This cluster of scores makes the R7 250 a solid performer in its immediate performance class.

The HD 6950's score of 6210 is in a different performance tier. It is 0.2% ahead of the AMD FirePro W600 (6223), 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 (6270), 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER (6270), and 1.1% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K620 (6282). While these rival names are from different generations, the data shows the HD 6950's raw compute score is competitive with this specific group. The 21.7% delta in the head-to-head test, however, is the definitive measurement for this comparison, showing the R7 250 as the winner.

The R7 250 also holds a higher percentile rank. It sits at the 41st percentile versus all GPUs, while the HD 6950 sits at the 36th percentile. This means the R7 250 performs better in the database's overall distribution than the HD 6950. The average benchmark score for the R7 250 is 7557, which matches its single test result, and the same is true for the HD 6950 at 6210.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear split between the two cards. The AMD Radeon R7 250 is the winner in the recorded compute benchmark, with a 21.7% higher score in Geekbench OpenCL. It offers a more modern feature set including DirectX 12 (11_1) support and Vulkan, and it does so with a much lower TDP of 55 W and a single-slot design that requires no external power connectors. Its transistor density of 12.2M / mm² on a 28 nm process shows a more advanced manufacturing node. For users whose primary need is general compute performance, modern API compatibility, and a low-power, compact form factor, the R7 250 is the superior choice.

The AMD Radeon HD 6950, on the other hand, is a larger, more power-hungry card with substantial raw graphics horsepower. It has a TDP of 200 W, requires two 6-pin power connectors, and is a dual-slot design. Its advantage lies in its massive memory bandwidth of 160.0 GB/s, a 256-bit bus, and higher pixel and texture rates. With 1408 shading units and 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, it is built to push pixels. For applications that are limited by fill rate, texture throughput, or need more video memory, the HD 6950's specifications suggest it could be the stronger option, despite its lower OpenCL score.

Therefore, the choice depends on the intended workload. For compute tasks and modern software, the R7 250 is the better card. For traditional gaming or rendering tasks that benefit from high memory bandwidth and raw pixel pushing power, the HD 6950's architecture has the theoretical edge. The benchmark data, however, ultimately shows the R7 250 as the more efficient and higher-scoring card in the tested workload. Its higher percentile rank and victory in the head-to-head benchmark make it the recommended choice for general use.