Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

R7 250 vs HD 7750?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
October 14, 2013 11:34:25 AM

Hey, I was about to buy the 7750 and then realized the R7 250 had just been released. I read that it was supposed to be a replacement for the 7750, is this correct? I like the 7750 for its single slot size and no need for extra power cable. Will the R7 250 comply with these requirements while providing a performance boost?

More about : 250 7750

October 23, 2013 12:10:54 PM

the r7 250 seems to be slightly slower than the 7750. Does anyone know if the 260x requires the crossfire bridge? I'm hoping to crossfire it with my a10-6800k
m
0
l
Related resources

Best solution

October 28, 2013 10:31:07 AM

yea, you are right, the R7 250 is a little bit slower than the 7750, but faster than the 7730



Full test:
http://www.tomshardware.de/r7-250-240-review-test,testb...

Share
November 11, 2013 10:23:45 AM

Well i am late to the party but you may wanna know that R7 250 will support Direct X 11.2.
m
0
l
November 23, 2013 7:42:34 AM

It's kind of a let down, especially when even 7770 is cheaper than R7 250 atm.
m
0
l
May 9, 2014 2:22:47 PM

Is R7 250x better than 7750 or not ??
m
0
l
June 30, 2014 6:01:19 PM

harry samra said:
Is R7 250x better than 7750 or not ??


Better go for hd 7750 gddr5 than r7 250.
m
0
l
August 2, 2014 4:54:17 AM

I'm really late, but I'd just like to point out that the R7-250X (with the X) is a rebadged version of the 7770
m
0
l
September 6, 2014 8:25:51 AM

ryanaz said:
the r7 250 seems to be slightly slower than the 7750. Does anyone know if the 260x requires the crossfire bridge? I'm hoping to crossfire it with my a10-6800k


I believe that when using an APU, you don't need a crossfire bridge. It should work in Dual Graphics mode just by having both of them plugged into the mobo.

m
0
l
September 10, 2014 10:17:37 AM

dome94 said:
yea, you are right, the R7 250 is a little bit slower than the 7750, but faster than the 7730


Full test:
(link)

" alt="" class="imgLz frmImg " />" alt="" class="imgLz frmImg " />

@dome94 and
@Jesse Fitzpatrick

The conclusion and the link given by dome94 is very inaccurate.

Reasons:
1. the link he/she gives compares a slower/lower power version of the R7 250 to the 7750. It does not compare the standard version of the R7 250 with the 7750. AMD's naming flop is seen here, but the point to be taken is in the next point
2. The correct Toms review of the standard R7 250 is at http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r7-240-and-2...
3. The correct image comparing the standard R7-250 with the 7750 (and to the 7770) is http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r7-240-and-2...

In the image in this page, you will see that R7-250 is 90-92% as fast as the 7750, despite having 128 less shaders.

Please see the links I have given, I believe they are more accurate.
(and I don't know why the final post has some weird code included at the end. sorry.)" alt="" class="imgLz frmImg " />" alt="" class="imgLz frmImg " />
m
0
l
!