GeForce FX 5200 vs Quadro FX 3500M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3500M with GeForce FX 5200, including specs and performance data.

FX 3500M
2007
512 MB GDDR3, 45 Watt
0.73
+3550%

FX 3500M outperforms FX 5200 by a whopping 3550% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11961541
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.11no data
Power efficiency1.24no data
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Celsius (1999−2005)
GPU code nameG71NV18 C1
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date1 March 2007 (18 years ago)6 March 2003 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99.99 $69.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

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 cores32no data
Core clock speed575 MHz250 MHz
Boost clock speed575 MHzno data
Number of transistors278 million29 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Wattno data
Texture fill rate13.801.000
ROPs162
TMUs244

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-IIIAGP 8x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR3DDR
Maximum RAM amount512 MB128 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed600 MHz200 MHz
Memory bandwidth38.4 GB/s6.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)8.0
Shader Model3.0no data
OpenGL2.11.3
OpenCLN/AN/A
VulkanN/AN/A

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.

FX 3500M 0.73
+3550%
FX 5200 0.02

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 3500M 306
+4271%
FX 5200 7

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
God of War 5−6 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6 0−1
God of War 5−6 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9 0−1
Valorant 27−30 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 12−14 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6 0−1
God of War 5−6 0−1
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7 0−1
Valorant 27−30 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 12−14 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6 0−1
God of War 5−6 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7 0−1
Valorant 27−30 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 2−3 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2 0−1

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 0−1
Valorant 4−5 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.73 0.02
Recency 1 March 2007 6 March 2003
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 128 MB
Chip lithography 90 nm 150 nm

FX 3500M has a 3550% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 66.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro FX 3500M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3500M is a mobile workstation graphics card while GeForce FX 5200 is a desktop one.

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 3500M
Quadro FX 3500M
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200
GeForce FX 5200

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.


No user ratings yet.

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 292 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 3500M or GeForce FX 5200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.