1000M vs FX 3600M

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

FX 3600M
1.20

1000M outperforms FX 3600M by 23% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking1012937
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money0.150.12
ArchitectureG9x (2007−2010)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameNB8E-GLMFermi
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date23 February 2008 (16 years old)22 February 2011 (13 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$174.95
Current price$80 $129 (0.7x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

FX 3600M has 25% better value for money than Quadro 1000M.

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores9696
Core clock speed500 MHz700 MHz
Number of transistors754 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)70 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate16.0011.20
Floating-point performance160 gflops268.8 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on Quadro FX 3600M and Quadro 1000M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizelargemedium sized
InterfaceMXM-HEMXM-A (3.0)

Memory

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 typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.14 GB/s28.8 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.12.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FX 3600M 1.20
Quadro 1000M 1.47
+22.5%

1000M outperforms FX 3600M by 23% in our combined benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

FX 3600M 466
Quadro 1000M 570
+22.3%

1000M outperforms FX 3600M by 22% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD30−35
−36.7%
41
+36.7%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 1−2
Hitman 3 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 1−2
Hitman 3 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 1−2
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how FX 3600M and Quadro 1000M compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • Quadro 1000M is 36.7% faster than FX 3600M

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Hitman 3, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro 1000M is 100% faster than the FX 3600M.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro 1000M is ahead in 9 tests (31%)
  • there's a draw in 20 tests (69%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 1.20 1.47
Recency 23 February 2008 22 February 2011
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 70 Watt 45 Watt

The Quadro 1000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3600M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Quadro FX 3600M
Quadro FX 3600M
NVIDIA Quadro 1000M
Quadro 1000M

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User ratings: view and submit

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


3.8 8 votes

Rate NVIDIA Quadro FX 3600M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 99 votes

Rate NVIDIA Quadro 1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.