Radeon HD 6450M vs Quadro FX 3500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3500 with Radeon HD 6450M, including specs and performance data.


FX 3500
2006, $1,599
256 MB GDDR3, 80 Watt
0.63
+5%

FX 3500 outperforms HD 6450M by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12551267
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.61no data
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameG71Seymour
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date22 May 2006 (19 years ago)4 January 2011 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,599 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 coresno data160
Core clock speed450 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors278 million370 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Wattno data
Texture fill rate9.0004.800
Floating-point processing powerno data0.192 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs208
L1 Cacheno data16 KB
L2 Cacheno data128 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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length173 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount256 MB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed660 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth42.24 GB/s12.8 GB/s
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model3.05.0
OpenGL2.14.4
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/AN/A

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 HD8−9
+0%
8
+0%

Cost per frame, $

1080p199.88no data

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%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Ultra

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

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how FX 3500 and HD 6450M compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 28 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.63 0.60
Recency 22 May 2006 4 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 40 nm

FX 3500 has a 5% higher aggregate performance score.

HD 6450M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 125% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro FX 3500 and Radeon HD 6450M.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3500 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 6450M is a notebook 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.


4.1 9 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 7 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6450M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 3500 or Radeon HD 6450M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.