Radeon 760M vs Quadro FX 1500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 1500 with Radeon 760M, including specs and performance data.

FX 1500
2006
256 MB GDDR3, 65 Watt
0.43

760M outperforms FX 1500 by a whopping 3305% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1261365
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.4667.77
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025)
GPU code nameG71Hawx Point
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date20 April 2006 (18 years ago)6 December 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$699 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA coresno data512
Core clock speed325 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2599 MHz
Number of transistors278 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate7.80083.17
Floating-point processing powerno data5.323 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs2432
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length173 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount256 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed625 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth40 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model3.06.8
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A2.1
VulkanN/A1.3

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

FX 1500 0.43
Radeon 760M 14.64
+3305%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

FX 1500 169
Radeon 760M 5694
+3269%

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 HD0−133
1440p0−124

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 39
+0%
39
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 25
+0%
25
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30
+0%
30
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 29
+0%
29
+0%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 19
+0%
19
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+0%
24
+0%
Far Cry 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 17
+0%
17
+0%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18
+0%
18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Dota 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 34
+0%
34
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 36
+0%
36
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Dota 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
+0%
23
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.43 14.64
Recency 20 April 2006 6 December 2023
Chip lithography 90 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 760M has a 3304.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, a 2150% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 760M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 1500 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 1500 is a workstation card while Radeon 760M is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

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


NVIDIA Quadro FX 1500
Quadro FX 1500
AMD Radeon 760M
Radeon 760M

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.


3.4 34 votes

Rate Quadro FX 1500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 235 votes

Rate Radeon 760M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 1500 or Radeon 760M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.