UHD Graphics 615 vs Quadro FX 3600M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3600M with UHD Graphics 615, including specs and performance data.

FX 3600M
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 70 Watt
1.11

Graphics 615 outperforms 3600M by an impressive 65% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1116958
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.229.38
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameG92Amber Lake GT2
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date23 February 2008 (17 years ago)7 November 2018 (7 years ago)

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 cores64192
Core clock speed500 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data900 MHz
Number of transistors754 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)70 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate16.0021.60
Floating-point processing power0.16 TFLOPS0.3456 TFLOPS
ROPs163
TMUs3224
L2 Cache64 KBno data

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-HERing Bus

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount512 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed799 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth51.14 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.1-

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.

FX 3600M 1.11
UHD Graphics 615 1.83
+64.9%

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 3600M 466
Samples: 36
UHD Graphics 615 764
+63.9%

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 HD6−7
−66.7%
10
+66.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 0−1 4−5
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Fortnite 2−3
−300%
8
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Valorant 30−35
−18.8%
35−40
+18.8%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 0−1 4−5
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
−40.7%
35−40
+40.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Dota 2 14−16
+15.4%
13
−15.4%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Fortnite 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Valorant 30−35
−18.8%
35−40
+18.8%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 0−1 4−5
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Dota 2 14−16
+36.4%
11
−36.4%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Valorant 30−35
−18.8%
35−40
+18.8%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 7−8
−85.7%
12−14
+85.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−50%
18−20
+50%
Valorant 2−3
−550%
12−14
+550%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 1−2
Far Cry 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 0−1 4−5
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra

Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1

This is how FX 3600M and UHD Graphics 615 compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 615 is 67% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the FX 3600M is 100% faster.
  • in Valorant, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics 615 is 550% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • FX 3600M performs better in 3 tests (6%)
  • UHD Graphics 615 performs better in 36 tests (75%)
  • there's a draw in 9 tests (19%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.11 1.83
Recency 23 February 2008 7 November 2018
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 70 Watt 15 Watt

UHD Graphics 615 has a 64.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 366.7% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 615 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3600M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3600M is a mobile workstation graphics card while UHD Graphics 615 is a mobile workstation 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 3600M
Quadro FX 3600M
Intel UHD Graphics 615
UHD Graphics 615

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.


3.8 8 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3600M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 52 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 615 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 3600M or UHD Graphics 615, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.