Oddly enough, the R7 360 was the only card among the main desktop variants powered by the 2nd-gen GCN architecture, which offered slightly better power efficiency and native FreeSync (Variable Refresh Rate) support. The R7 350, 360, and 370 are based on the same 28 nm GCN architecture as the R7 200 family of graphics cards. The R7 250X can deliver respectable framerates in newer games as long as the resolution and graphics are set to low. When paired with a decent CPU, you can probably enjoy some eSports games (e.g., CSGO, Valorant, Overwatch) as well. If you are looking to play older titles, then the R7 200 cards are still a good buy (at dirt-cheap prices, of course). The comparison chart below will help you understand the technical differences between the Radeon R7 240, 250, and 250X cards. The R7 250X is a rebadge of the HD 7770 GHz Edition, which is slightly faster than its non-X counterpart but has double the power consumption. The R7 250 is a beefed-up version of the R7 240, but the performance difference is negligible on newer titles. If you can find one used under $10, it’s a fitting addition to pre-builts and regular PCs with power supply wattage limitations. However, the R7 240 has a low-profile design that doesn’t need active cooling or additional power requirement. Fast forward to 2021, it struggles to offer acceptable framerates on the latest AAA titles, even at 720p or lower resolutions, and very low graphics presets. The R7 240 was the most affordable mid-ranger in its class, delivering 900p 30 FPS gaming to the masses. All the cards targeted a sub-$100 price point when they launched in 2013. The R7 240, 250, and 250X are based on the 28 nm GCN (Graphics Core Next) architecture, a successor to the 40 nm TeraScale GPU architecture found on older Radeon HD cards.
0 kommentar(er)
