ION 2 vs Quadro FX 1600M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 1600M with ION 2, including specs and performance data.

FX 1600M
2007, $150
512 MB GDDR3, 50 Watt
0.46
+53.3%

1600M outperforms ION 2 by an impressive 53% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13101391
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency0.711.16
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameG84GT218
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date1 June 2007 (18 years ago)3 June 2008 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149.90 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores3216
Core clock speed625 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors289 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate10.004.000
Floating-point processing power0.08 TFLOPS0.03424 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs168
L2 Cache32 KB32 KB

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-HEPCIe 2.0 x16

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 amount512 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed800 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.04.1
OpenGL3.33.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.11.2

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+3.8%
24−27
−3.8%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+3.8%
24−27
−3.8%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+3.8%
24−27
−3.8%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the FX 1600M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • FX 1600M performs better in 12 tests (46%)
  • there's a draw in 14 tests (54%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.46 0.30
Recency 1 June 2007 3 June 2008
Chip lithography 80 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 20 Watt

FX 1600M has a 53% higher aggregate performance score.

ION 2, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

The Quadro FX 1600M is our recommended choice as it beats the ION 2 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 1600M is a mobile workstation graphics card while ION 2 is a mobile workstation 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.


2.8 8 votes

Rate Quadro FX 1600M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 27 votes

Rate ION 2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 1600M or ION 2, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.