Radeon RX Vega 3 vs Quadro FX 2500M

Place in the ranking	1209	776
Place by popularity	not in top-100	80
Power efficiency	0.87	13.85
Architecture	Curie (2003−2013)	GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code name	G71	Picasso
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	29 September 2005 (19 years ago)	6 January 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$99.99	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores	32	192
Core clock speed	500 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	500 MHz	1001 MHz
Number of transistors	278 million	4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology	90 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	12.00	12.01
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.3844 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	4
TMUs	24	12

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 size	large	no data
Interface	MXM-III	IGP
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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 type	GDDR3	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	System Shared
Memory bus width	256 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	600 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	38.4 GB/s	no 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 Connectors

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	9.0c (9_3)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	3.0	6.4
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	N/A	2.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131

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. 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 2500M 0.56

RX Vega 3 2.98
+432%

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 2500M 217

RX Vega 3 1149
+429%

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 HD

2−3

−500%

12
+500%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

50.00

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−100%

6−7
+100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −75%	7 +75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −100%	6 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −700%	8−9 +700%
Hitman 3	5−6 +0%	5 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −100%	21−24 +100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −100%	12−14 +100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −30%	35−40 +30%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −700%	8−9 +700%
Hitman 3	5−6 −60%	8−9 +60%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −100%	21−24 +100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −83.3%	11 +83.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −70%	17 +70%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −30%	35−40 +30%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Hitman 3	5−6 −60%	8−9 +60%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +22.2%	9 −22.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −50%	9 +50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +150%	4 −150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −30%	35−40 +30%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−300%

4−5
+300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	3−4
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Hitman 3	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −1700%	18−20 +1700%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−100%

6−7
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	1−2

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−100%

4−5
+100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6 +0%	6 +0%
Battlefield 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	7 +0%	7 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6 +0%	6 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Battlefield 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8

+0%

7−8

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5

5−6

+0%

5−6

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

This is how FX 2500M and RX Vega 3 compete in popular games:

RX Vega 3 is 500% faster in 1080p

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

in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the FX 2500M is 150% faster.
in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX Vega 3 is 1700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

FX 2500M is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
RX Vega 3 is ahead in 31 test (53%)
there's a draw in 26 tests (44%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.56	2.98
Recency	29 September 2005	6 January 2019
Chip lithography	90 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	15 Watt

RX Vega 3 has a 432.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 542.9% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 3 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2500M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 2500M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX Vega 3 is a mobile workstation one.

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