Radeon HD 6450 vs Quadro FX 3500M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro FX 3500M with Radeon HD 6450, including specs and performance data.
3500M outperforms HD 6450 by an impressive 55% 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 | 1224 | 1308 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.11 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.25 | 2.01 |
| Architecture | Curie (2003−2013) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | G71 | Caicos |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Design | no data | reference |
| Release date | 1 March 2007 (19 years ago) | 7 April 2011 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $99.99 | $55 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
FX 3500M and HD 6450 have a nearly equal value for money.
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 cores | 32 | 160 |
| Core clock speed | 575 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 575 MHz | 750 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 278 million | 370 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 90 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 30 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 13.80 | 5.000 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.2 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 4 |
| TMUs | 24 | 8 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 16 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 128 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).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Bus support | no data | PCIe 2.0 x8 |
| Interface | MXM-III | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 168 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| 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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 600 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 8.5-12.8 GB/x (DDR3) or 25.6-28.8 GB/s (GDDR5) |
| 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 | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
| Eyefinity | - | + |
| Number of Eyefinity displays | no data | 4 |
| HDMI | - | + |
| DisplayPort support | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| CrossFire | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 9.0c (9_3) | DirectX® 11 |
| Shader Model | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
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.
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
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+61.1%
|
18−20
−61.1%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
+75%
|
12−14
−75%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+62.5%
|
8−9
−62.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+61.1%
|
18−20
−61.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+62.5%
|
8−9
−62.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+61.1%
|
18−20
−61.1%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+55.6%
|
9−10
−55.6%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.73 | 0.47 |
| Recency | 1 March 2007 | 7 April 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 1 GB |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 30 Watt |
FX 3500M has a 55% higher aggregate performance score.
HD 6450, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 125% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.
The Quadro FX 3500M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6450 in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro FX 3500M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 6450 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
