Radeon RX 6500 XT vs Quadro FX 3450

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3450 with Radeon RX 6500 XT, including specs and performance data.

FX 3450
2005
256 MB GDDR3, 83 Watt
0.37

RX 6500 XT outperforms FX 3450 by a whopping 6386% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1274230
Place by popularitynot in top-10095
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.0157.70
Power efficiency0.3216.03
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameNV41Navi 24
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date28 July 2005 (19 years ago)19 January 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$135.75 $199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RX 6500 XT has 576900% better value for money than FX 3450.

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 data1024
Core clock speed425 MHz2610 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2815 MHz
Number of transistors190 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)83 Watt107 Watt
Texture fill rate5.100180.2
Floating-point processing powerno data5.765 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs1264
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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 x4
Length226 mmno data
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1x 6-pin

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz2248 MHz
Memory bandwidth32 GB/s143.9 GB/s
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-Video1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

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 Model3.06.6
OpenGL2.0 (full) 2.1 (partial)4.6
OpenCLN/A2.2
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. 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 3450 0.37
RX 6500 XT 24.00
+6386%

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 3450 148
RX 6500 XT 9554
+6355%

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 HD0−164
1440p-0−130
4K-0−116

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.11
1440pno data6.63
4Kno data12.44

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 64
+0%
64
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 72
+0%
72
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27
+0%
27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 128
+0%
128
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 66
+0%
66
+0%
Metro Exodus 97
+0%
97
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 17
+0%
17
+0%
Dota 2 106
+0%
106
+0%
Far Cry 5 43
+0%
43
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 107
+0%
107
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 86
+0%
86
+0%
Metro Exodus 62
+0%
62
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Valorant 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
World of Tanks 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24
+0%
24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 15
+0%
15
+0%
Dota 2 110
+0%
110
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 83
+0%
83
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 47
+0%
47
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 37
+0%
37
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 37
+0%
37
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
World of Tanks 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+0%
9
+0%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 56
+0%
56
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Metro Exodus 57
+0%
57
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 34
+0%
34
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 34
+0%
34
+0%
Metro Exodus 11
+0%
11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 34
+0%
34
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2
+0%
2
+0%
Dota 2 67
+0%
67
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 25
+0%
25
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3
+0%
3
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.37 24.00
Recency 28 July 2005 19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 83 Watt 107 Watt

FX 3450 has 28.9% lower power consumption.

RX 6500 XT, on the other hand, has a 6386.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 2066.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6500 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3450 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3450 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6500 XT is a desktop one.


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

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 3450
Quadro FX 3450
AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT
Radeon RX 6500 XT

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 10 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 3385 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6500 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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