NVIDIA
GeForce GTS 250 vs Radeon RX 6950 XT
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
AMD
RX 6950 XT
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GTS 250 and RX 6950 XT across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗RX 6950 XT outperforms GTS 250 by ~46% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+46%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: GeForce GTS 250 (~10%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider GTS 250
- Lower stated power consumption
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.1 · Not supported
Reasons to consider RX 6950 XT
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 2.1 · FSR
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIA
AMDPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3957
8757
10045
1388
Graphics card ranking
Positions 67–72of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce GTS 250
155 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
GeForce GTS 250
Price $22.49Based on catalog performance per unit of current market price, not measured FPS.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
39
57Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
34
47Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
32
45Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
87Better
57
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
55Better
50
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Device class
USB Type-C
DirectX
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Memory type
Max monitors
Max resolution
Power connector
Release date
Architecture
Thickness
Compute API
Launch priceBetter
Shader units / coresBetter
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory bus
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Recommended PSUBetter
LengthBetter
Die sizeBetter
Memory cacheBetter
Transistor countBetter
Vulkan
Upscaling
DisplayPort
HDMI
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GTS 250 and RX 6950 XT across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
GTS 250RX 6950 XT
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
196 FPS
234 FPS
1080p Ultra
137 FPS
165 FPS
1440p Ultra
77 FPS
128 FPS
4K Ultra
29 FPS
64 FPS
Counter-Strike 2GTS 250196 FPSRX 6950 XT234 FPSGTS 250137 FPSRX 6950 XT165 FPSGTS 25077 FPSRX 6950 XT128 FPSGTS 25029 FPSRX 6950 XT64 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077GTS 250126 FPSRX 6950 XT151 FPSGTS 250109 FPSRX 6950 XT130 FPSGTS 25056 FPSRX 6950 XT93 FPSGTS 25019 FPSRX 6950 XT43 FPS
Forza Horizon 5GTS 250159 FPSRX 6950 XT191 FPSGTS 250103 FPSRX 6950 XT124 FPSGTS 25069 FPSRX 6950 XT115 FPSGTS 25043 FPSRX 6950 XT94 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyGTS 250103 FPSRX 6950 XT124 FPSGTS 25086 FPSRX 6950 XT103 FPSGTS 25050 FPSRX 6950 XT83 FPSGTS 25020 FPSRX 6950 XT43 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100395738%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100336565%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100326669%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 1001388149%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 100875742%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100277190%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100286985%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100326669%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 1002474102%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100316672%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX10.012.2
VulkanNot supported1.4
OpenGL3.34.6
UpscalingNot supportedFSR
Compute APIOpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.1OpenCL 2.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureTeslaRDNA 2.0
Process node55 nm7 nmBetter
Release date20092022
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count754 million26800 millionBetter
Die size260 mm²Better520 mm²
Shader units / cores1285120Better
Base clock738 MHz1925 MHzBetter
Boost clock738 MHz2324 MHzBetter
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 2x16PCIe 4x16
Length229 mmBetter267 mm
ThicknessDual-slotTriple-slot
Recommended PSU450 WBetter700 W
Power connector6 pin8+8 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMIBoard dependentHDMI 2.1
DisplayPortBoard dependentDisplayPort 1.4a
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitors23
Max resolution2560 × 16007680 × 4320
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM512 MB GDDR3Better16 GB GDDR6
Memory typeGDDR3GDDR6
Memory bus256 bit256 bit
TFLOPS0.41523.65Better
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 70
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (4)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (6)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record changed: product_prices
- · Record changed: product_prices
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GTS 250 or RX 6950 XT?+
GTS 250 has the higher overall gaming score, while GTS 250 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GTS 250 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GTS 250 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GTS 250 offers more overall performance, while GTS 250 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GTS 250 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GTS 250 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GTS 250 leads in combined 1440p performance. GTS 250 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GTS 250 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GTS 250 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GTS 250 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to GTS 250 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.