Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics vs Quadro FX 350

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1464not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.74no data
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Gen. 5 Arrandale (2010)
GPU code nameG72GMA HD
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date20 April 2006 (20 years ago)10 January 2010 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA coresno data12
Core clock speed550 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors112 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology90 nm45 nm
Power consumption (TDP)21 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate2.200no data
ROPs2no data
TMUs4no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16no data
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDR2no data
Maximum RAM amount128 MBno data
Memory bus width64 Bitno data
Memory clock speed405 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth6.48 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno data+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGAno data

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX9.0c (9_3)10
Shader Model3.0no data
OpenGL2.1no data
OpenCLN/Ano data
VulkanN/A-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 20 April 2006 10 January 2010
Chip lithography 90 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 21 Watt 35 Watt

FX 350 has 67% lower power consumption.

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Quadro FX 350 and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro FX 350 is a workstation graphics card while Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


5 1 vote

Rate Quadro FX 350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 146 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 350 or Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.