Radeon 610M vs Quadro FX 2800M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro FX 2800M with Radeon 610M, including specs and performance data.
610M outperforms 2800M by a whopping 213% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1171 | 819 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 78 |
| Power efficiency | 1.02 | 15.95 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | G92 | Dragon Range |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 December 2009 (16 years ago) | 3 January 2023 (3 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 cores | 96 | 128 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2200 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 754 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 28.80 | 17.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.288 TFLOPS | 0.5632 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 4 |
| TMUs | 48 | 8 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 2 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 32 KB |
| L1 Cache | no data | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | 64 KB | 2 MB |
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-B (3.0) | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| 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 | 1 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 64 GB/s | no 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 Connectors | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| CUDA | + | - |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
3DMark Vantage Performance
3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.
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 | 31
+182%
| 11
−182%
|
| 1440p | 7−8
−257%
| 25
+257%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 2−3
−450%
|
10−12
+450%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−1300%
|
14
+1300%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−1600%
|
16−18
+1600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−150%
|
14−16
+150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−51.6%
|
45−50
+51.6%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
−132%
|
55−60
+132%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−114%
|
30−33
+114%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 2−3
−450%
|
10−12
+450%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−1200%
|
13
+1200%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−1600%
|
16−18
+1600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−150%
|
14−16
+150%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−800%
|
9
+800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−117%
|
13
+117%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−51.6%
|
45−50
+51.6%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−114%
|
30−33
+114%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 2−3
−450%
|
10−12
+450%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−1100%
|
12
+1100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−150%
|
14−16
+150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8
+33.3%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−51.6%
|
45−50
+51.6%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−1600%
|
16−18
+1600%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 6−7
−283%
|
21−24
+283%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−155%
|
27−30
+155%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−6000%
|
61
+6000%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Escape from Tarkov | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 5−6 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−500%
|
6−7
+500%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 7−8
−100%
|
14−16
+100%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 52
+0%
|
52
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 38
+0%
|
38
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16
+0%
|
16
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12
+0%
|
12
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
This is how FX 2800M and Radeon 610M compete in popular games:
- FX 2800M is 182% faster in 1080p
- Radeon 610M is 257% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 610M is 6000% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Radeon 610M performs better in 39 tests (71%)
- there's a draw in 16 tests (29%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.99 | 3.10 |
| Recency | 1 December 2009 | 3 January 2023 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 15 Watt |
Radeon 610M has a 213% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 1200% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.
The Radeon 610M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2800M in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro FX 2800M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon 610M 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.
