GeForce GTX 1650 vs Quadro FX 3500

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

FX 3500
2006
256 MB GDDR3
0.67

GeForce GTX 1650 outperforms Quadro FX 3500 by 2937% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking1139254
Place by popularitynot in top-1003
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data19.01
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code nameG71TU117
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date22 May 2006 (17 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,599 $149
Current price$920 (0.6x MSRP)$185 (1.2x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

FX 3500 and GTX 1650 have a nearly equal value for money.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA coresno data896
Core clock speed450 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1665 MHz
Number of transistors278 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate9.00093.24

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 3.0 x16
Length173 mm229 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

Memory typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount256 MB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1320 MHz8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth42.24 GB/s128.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMIno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 (12_1)
Shader Model3.06.5
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDAno data7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 3500 0.67
GTX 1650 20.35
+2937%

GeForce GTX 1650 outperforms Quadro FX 3500 by 2937% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

FX 3500 259
GTX 1650 7877
+2941%

GeForce GTX 1650 outperforms Quadro FX 3500 by 2941% in Passmark.

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 HD2−3
−3400%
70
+3400%
1440p1−2
−3700%
38
+3700%
4K0−123

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.67 20.35
Recency 22 May 2006 23 April 2019
Cost $1599 $149
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 75 Watt

The GeForce GTX 1650 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3500 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3500 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 1650 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 3500
Quadro FX 3500
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.1 9 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 20672 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 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.