[nextpage title=”Introduction”]
Let’s analyze the Radeon R7 250 Core Edition (R7-250A-ZLF4) from the traditional manufacturer XFX, a low profile video card with 1 GiB of GDDR5 memory that competes with the GeForce GT 640 GPU from NVIDIA.
The Radeon R7 250 is a rebranded Radeon HD 8670 chip, although according to AMD, the HD 8670 is compatible with DirectX 11.1 and the R7 250 is DirectX 11.2.
It is important to notice that there are video cards based on the Radeon R7 250 GPU using DDR3 memory running at 1.8 GHz (providing a 28.8 GB/s bandwidth).
The Radeon R7 250 uses the PCI Express 3.0 interface, while its main competitor uses the PCI Express 2.0 interface. Although the chip supports PCI Express 3.0 x16, the video card we tested offers only half of the supported lanes and, therefore, it is a PCI Express 3.0 x8 card.
In the table below, we compare the main specifications for the video cards included in our review. The prices were researched at Newegg.com on the day we published this review and do not include rebates.
| Video Card | Core Clock | Shader Clock | Memory Clock (Effective) | Memory Interface | Memory Transfer Rate | Memory | Shaders | DirectX | Price |
| Radeon R7 250 | 1,050 MHz | 1,050 MHz | 4.6 GHz | 128-bit | 73.6 GB/s | 1 GiB GDDR5 | 384 | 11.2 | USD 100.00 |
| GeForce GT 640 | 900 MHz | 1,800 MHz | 1.6 GHz | 128-bit | 25.6 GB/s | 2 GiB DDR3 | 384 | 11.0 | USD 100.00 |
| Radeon R7 240 | 780 MHz | 780 MHz | 1.8 GHz | 128-bit | 28.8 GB/s | 2 GiB DDR3 | 320 | 11.2 | USD 70.00 |
| GeForce GT 630 | 810 MHz | 1,620 MHz | 1.33 GHz | 128-bit | 21.3 GB/s | 1 GiB DDR3 | 96 | 11.0 | USD 70.00 |
You can compare the specs of these video cards with other video cards by taking a look at our “AMD ATI Chips Comparison Table” and “NVIDIA Chips Comparison Table” tutorials.
Now let’s take an in-depth look at the XFX Radeon R7 250 Core Edition.
[nextpage title=”The XFX R7 250 Core Edition”]
In Figure 1, you can see the box of the XFX R7 250 Core Edition, and Figure 2 shows the board itself. It is a dual-slot, low profile card, with no auxiliary power connector, since its TDP is only 65 W.
Figure 1: Box
Figure 2: The XFX Radeon R7 250 Core Edition
Figure 3 shows the solder side of the card.
Figure 3: Solder side
The portrayed video card has three connectors: one VGA, one HDMI, and one DVI-D, but supports only two displays at the same time.
Figure 4: Video connectors
[nextpage title=”The XFX R7 250 Core Edition (Cont’d)”]
The XFX R7 250 Core Edition uses a simple cooler with a 50 mm fan. This cooler does not touch the memory chips. As mentioned, the Radeon R7 250 has a TDP of 65 W. The card is 7.0” (178 mm) long.
Figure 5: Cooler removed
The video card uses a voltage regulator with two phases for the GPU and one phase for the memory chips. The voltage regulator circuit uses a digital design and is controlled by an APW7153B chip. All capacitors are solid.
Figure 6: Voltage regulator
The reviewed video card uses four Elpida W2032BBBG-6A-F GDDR5 chips, each one storing 2 Gbits of data, comprising the 1 GiB of memory available on this video card. These chips can run up to 6,000 MHz. On this video card, they are accessed at 4,600 MHz, which means there is a good margin for safely increasing the memory clock.
Figure 7: One of the four memory chips
The only accessories that come with this video card (besides a manual and a driver disc) are two brackets that can be used to install it in low profile cases, shown in Figure 8.
Figure 8: Accessories
Before seeing the performance results, let’s recap the main features of this video card.
[nextpage title=”Main Specifications “]
The main specifications for the XFX Radeon R7 250 Core Edition (R7-250A-ZLF4) include:
- Graphics chip: Radeon R7 250 running at 1050 MHz
- Memory: 1 GiB GDDR5 memory (128-bit interface), four Elpida W2032BBBG-6A-F chips running at 4.6 GHz QDR
- Bus type: PCI Express 3.0 x8
- Video Connectors: One DVI-D, one HDMI, and one VGA
- Cables and adapters that come with this board: Two low profile brackets
- Number of CDs/DVDs that come with this board: One
- Games included: None
- Programs included: None
- More information: https://www.xfxforce.com
- Average Price in the U.S.*: USD 110.00
* Researched at Newegg.com on the day we published this review.
[nextpage title=”How We Tested”]
During our benchmarking sessions, we used the configuration listed below. Between our benchmarking sessions, the only variable was the video card being tested.
Hardware Configuration
- CPU: AMD FX 8350
- Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty 990FX Killer
- Memory: 16 GiB DDR3-2133/PC3-17000, four G.Skill F3-17000CL9Q 4 GiB memory modules
- Hard disk drive: Seagate Desktop SSHD 2 TB
- Video monitor: Philips 236VL
- Power Supply: Seventeam ST-550P-AM
- CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Seidon 120XL
Software Configuration
- Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
- Video resolution: 1920×1080 @ 60 Hz
Driver Versions
- AMD video driver version: Catalyst 14.1
- NVIDIA video driver version: 334.89
Software Used
- 3DMark 1.2.250
- Assassin’s Creed IV Black Flag
- Battlefield 4
- Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon
- Splinter Cell Blacklist
Error Margin
We adopted a 3% error margin. Thus, differences below 3% cannot be considered relevant. In other words, products with a performance difference below 3% should be considered as having similar performance.
[nextpage title=”3DMark”]
3DMark is a program with a set of three benchmarks: Ice Storm, Cloud Gate, and Fire Strike.
The 3DMark Ice Storm benchmark measures DirectX 9 performance. Since it is compatible with very low-end systems, we ran it in the Extreme mode, which uses the 1920×1080 resolution and high quality textures.
The 3DMark Cloud Gate benchmark measures DirectX 10 performance. It runs at 1280 x 720 resolution.
And the 3DMark Fire Strike benchmark measures DirectX 11 performance, and is aimed on high-end gamer PCs. It runs at 1920×1080 resolution.
| 3DMark – Ice Storm Extreme | Score | Difference |
| XFX Radeon R7 250 Core Edition | 66900 | |
| GeForce GT 640 | 44872 | 33% |
| Radeon R7 240 | 42199 | 37% |
| GeForce GT 630 | 32532 | 51% |
| 3DMark – Cloud Gate | Score | Difference |
| XFX Radeon R7 250 Core Edition | 11179 | |
| GeForce GT 640 | 8522 | 24% |
| Radeon R7 240 | 7273 | 35% |
| GeForce GT 630 | 5913 | 47% |
| 3DMark – Fire Strike | Score | Difference |
| XFX Radeon R7 250 Core Edition | 2014 | |
| GeForce GT 640 | 1399 | 31% |
| Radeon R7 240 | 1109 | 45% |
| GeForce GT 630 | 772 | 62% |
[nextpage title=”Assassin’s Creed IV Black Flag”]
Released in 2013, Assassin’s Creed IV Black Flag uses the AnvilNext DirectX 11 engine. We adjusted the resolution at 1920×1080, setting all image quality options to “high”, adjusting anti-aliasing to “FXAA,” and disabling “vsync,” then played the first mission of the game three times, measuring the number of frames per second using FRAPS. The results below are expressed in frames per second and are an arithmetic average of the three results collected.
| Assassin’s Creed IV Black Flag | FPS | Difference |
| XFX Radeon R7 250 Core Edition | 22 | |
| GeForce GT 640 | 16 | 27% |
| Radeon R7 240 | 13 | 41% |
| GeForce GT 630 | 9 | 59% |
[nextpage title=”Battlefield 4″]
Battlefield 4 is the latest installment in the Battlefield franchise, released in 2013. It is based on the Frostbite 3 engine, which is DirectX 11. In order to measure performance using this game, we walked our way through the first mission three times, measuring the number of frames per second using FRAPS. We ran this game at 1920×1080, setting overall image quality at “medium.”
The results below are expressed in frames per second and are an arithmetic average of the three results collected.
| Battlefield 4 | FPS | Difference |
| XFX Radeon R7 250 Core Edition | 45 | |
| GeForce GT 640 | 29 | 36% |
| Radeon R7 240 | 26 | 42% |
| GeForce GT 630 | 18 | 60% |
[nextpage title=”Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon”]
Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon is the most recent addition to the popular FPS franchise. It was released in 2013.
It is based on the Dunia 2 engine, which is DirectX 11. In order to measure performance using this game, we played the first mission three times, measuring the number of frames per second using FRAPS. We ran this game at 1920×1080, setting overall image quality at “medium.”
The results below are expressed in frames per second and are an arithmetic average of the three results collected.
| Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon | FPS | Difference |
| XFX Radeon R7 250 Core Edition | 25 | |
| GeForce GT 640 | 21 | 16% |
| Radeon R7 240 | 14 | 44% |
| GeForce GT 630 | 13 | 48% |
[nextpage title=”Splinter Cell Blacklist”]
Splinter Cell Blacklist is an action/stealth game launched in 2013, based on the LEAD (Unreal 2.5) engine.
In order to measure performance using this game, we played the “Safehouse” mission three times, measuring the number of frames per second using FRAPS. We ran this game at 1920×1080, setting overall image quality at “high.”
The results below are expressed in frames per second and are an arithmetic average of the three results collected.
| Splinter Cell Blacklist | FPS | Difference |
| XFX Radeon R7 250 Core Edition | 26 | |
| GeForce GT 640 | 17 | 35% |
| Radeon R7 240 | 12 | 54% |
| GeForce GT 630 | 10 | 62% |
[nextpage title=”Conclusions”]
Being a value video card, the Radeon R7 250 is not aimed on gamers who want to play the most recent titles. It is intended to be used as a replacement for the CPU’s integrated graphics for general use, or for casual gameplay.
In our tests, the frame rate in recent games, with medium or high quality in 1920×1080 resolution, was a little low for a good gameplay. On the other hand, the card actually ran those games and, at lower resolution and video quality settings, a casual player can actually use it to have fun even with high demanding games.
The Radeon R7 250 with 1 GiB GDDR5 was faster than the GeForce GT 640 in all tests. But you need to keep in mind that, if you compare a Radeon R7 250 card with DDR3 memory and a GeForce GT 640 card with GDDR5, this picture can be different. This is a problem with low-end/mainstream video cards: memory configurations can vary a lot from one model to another, making different cards based on the same chip to show a big difference in performance.
Finally, we can say that, if you are looking for a value video card for casual gaming, the XFX Radeon R7 250 Core Edition is a good choice.
Leave a Reply