AMD Radeon HD 7730M vs AMD Radeon R7 250 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 250 scores 7557 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon HD 7730M scores 6581. The R7 250 leads by 14.8%.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same underlying architecture?

A: Yes, both are built on GCN 1.0 architecture and use the same 28 nm process node from TSMC. They also share identical transistor counts of 1,500 million and the same 123 mm² die size.

Q: What is the difference in memory capacity?

A: The Radeon R7 250 comes with 1024 MB of DDR3 memory, while the Radeon HD 7730M has 2 GB of DDR3 memory. Both use a 128-bit bus and achieve the same 28.80 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Radeon R7 250 achieves 14.80 GPixel/s, which is higher than the Radeon HD 7730M's 10.80 GPixel/s. The R7 250 also leads in texture rate at 29.60 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s.

Q: How do these GPUs compare in terms of power consumption?

A: The Radeon R7 250 is rated at 55 W TDP, while the Radeon HD 7730M is rated at 25 W TDP. The HD 7730M is a more power-efficient part, drawing less than half the power of the R7 250.

Q: What is the API support situation for both GPUs?

A: Both GPUs support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. There is no difference in API feature levels between the two.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon R7 250 wins in raw compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 7557 places it 14.8% ahead of the HD 7730M's 6581. This advantage makes it the better choice for OpenCL-accelerated workloads, such as general-purpose GPU computing tasks and applications that leverage the GPU for non-graphics processing.

The Radeon HD 7730M wins in power efficiency. With a TDP of 25 W compared to the R7 250's 55 W, the HD 7730M delivers its performance at less than half the power draw. This is a significant advantage in thermally constrained environments, such as thin-and-light laptops where the HD 7730M is typically found. The HD 7730M also offers double the memory capacity at 2 GB versus 1 GB, which can be beneficial for workloads that require larger framebuffers, even though bandwidth remains identical.

In terms of clock behavior, the HD 7730M has a base clock of 575 MHz and a boost clock of 675 MHz, whereas the R7 250 has no listed base or boost clocks in the database. The R7 250's higher pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s and texture rate of 29.60 GTexel/s indicate it processes geometry and textures faster, making it better suited for fill-rate-limited scenarios.

The HD 7730M is a mobile-oriented part with "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs, while the R7 250 is a desktop card with fixed display outputs including DVI, HDMI 1.4a, and DisplayPort 1.2. For desktop users needing a dedicated output configuration, the R7 250 is the clear choice.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture, which is a significant commonality. They share the same 28 nm process node from TSMC, the same foundry, and identical transistor counts of 1,500 million. The die size is also the same at 123 mm², resulting in an identical transistor density of 12.2M per mm².

The chip designs differ: the R7 250 uses the Cape Verde chip, while the HD 7730M uses the Chelsea chip. Despite the different chip names, the core configuration is identical. Both have 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. Neither GPU includes ray tracing cores or tensor cores.

The memory subsystems are architecturally similar in width and type. Both use DDR3 memory with a 128-bit bus and achieve the same 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is also the same at 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective data rate. The only difference in memory is the capacity: 1 GB on the R7 250 versus 2 GB on the HD 7730M.

The generation naming differs. The R7 250 belongs to the Volcanic Islands (R7 200) generation, while the HD 7730M belongs to the London (HD 7700M) generation. Their predecessors and successors also differ. The R7 250's predecessor is Sea Islands and its successor is Pirate Islands. The HD 7730M's predecessor is Vancouver and its successor is Solar System.

Both GPUs are end-of-life products. The R7 250 was released on October 7, 2013, while the HD 7730M was released earlier on April 23, 2012. The R7 250 is a desktop part with a single-slot form factor and no power connectors, requiring a 250 W suggested PSU. The HD 7730M lacks such desktop specifications, as it is designed for portable devices.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in several key specification fields. The most striking difference is in clock speeds. The HD 7730M has a base clock of 575 MHz and a boost clock of 675 MHz, while the R7 250 has no recorded base or boost clocks in the database. This absence suggests the R7 250's clocks are either dynamic or not publicly standardized.

Memory capacity differs: the R7 250 has 1024 MB, while the HD 7730M has 2 GB. Both use DDR3 with a 128-bit bus and identical bandwidth of 28.80 GB/s.

Pixel rate and texture rate differ significantly. The R7 250 achieves 14.80 GPixel/s and 29.60 GTexel/s, while the HD 7730M achieves 10.80 GPixel/s and 21.60 GTexel/s. These differences arise from the HD 7730M's lower clock speeds, despite identical core counts.

FP32 performance also differs. The R7 250 delivers 947.2 GFLOPS, while the HD 7730M delivers 691.2 GFLOPS. This is a 37% advantage for the R7 250 in raw floating-point throughput.

TDP is another major differentiator: 55 W for the R7 250 versus 25 W for the HD 7730M. The R7 250 is a single-slot desktop card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The HD 7730M has no slot width, power connector, or PSU specifications recorded, as it is a mobile part.

Bus interface differs as well. The R7 250 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the HD 7730M uses PCIe 2.0 x16. Display outputs are also different: the R7 250 has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2, while the HD 7730M's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent."

Physical dimensions are only recorded for the R7 250, which is 168 mm (6.6 inches) in length. No dimensions are available for the HD 7730M. The R7 250 also has a higher percentile rank at 41 versus 38 for the HD 7730M, indicating it sits higher in the overall GPU performance distribution.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the Radeon R7 250 scores 7557, while the Radeon HD 7730M scores 6581. The R7 250 wins this test with a delta of 14.8%. This is a substantial margin in compute performance.

Contextualizing the R7 250's score against its nearest rivals, it sits within 0.1% of the Intel Arc A310 (7550) and 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580). It is 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7472) and 1.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447). This places the R7 250 in a competitive position among entry-level and older mid-range GPUs, slightly outperforming some newer discrete options.

For the HD 7730M, its score of 6581 places it 0.4% ahead of the Intel UHD Graphics P750 (6554) and 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon R7 M460 (6612). It is 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M (6513) and 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M (6493). The HD 7730M's performance is thus clustered with integrated graphics and older mobile discrete parts.

The 14.8% delta between the two GPUs is significant in real-world terms. In OpenCL workloads, the R7 250 delivers noticeably faster compute throughput, which can translate to smoother performance in GPU-accelerated applications. However, the HD 7730M's lower TDP and higher memory capacity make it a more balanced mobile solution despite the compute deficit.

The R7 250's higher pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s versus 10.80 GPixel/s and texture rate of 29.60 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s further reinforce its lead in graphics-intensive tasks. The fp32 advantage of 947.2 GFLOPS versus 691.2 GFLOPS aligns with the OpenCL score difference, confirming that the R7 250 is the stronger compute and graphics performer overall.

The HD 7730M's boost clock of 675 MHz helps narrow the gap in some scenarios, but it cannot overcome the R7 250's unspecified but evidently higher clock operation. With identical core counts and memory bandwidth, the R7 250's advantage stems entirely from higher operating frequencies, which are reflected in its superior rates and scores.