GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile vs Quadro FX 370 LP

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 370 LP with GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FX 370 LP
2008
256 MB DDR2, 25 Watt
0.26

RTX 3050 6GB Mobile outperforms FX 370 LP by a whopping 8935% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1349222
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency0.7728.86
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameG98GN20-P0-R 6 GB
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date6 November 2008 (16 years ago)6 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$129 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

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 cores82560
Core clock speed540 MHz1237 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1492 MHz
Number of transistors210 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate4.320no data
Floating-point processing power0.01728 TFLOPSno data
ROPs4no data
TMUs8no 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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16no data
Length198 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 typeDDR2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB6 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz12000 MHz
Memory bandwidth8 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x DMS-59no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12_2
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA1.1-

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 HD0−169
1440p-0−137

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 81
+0%
81
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 48
+0%
48
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 32
+0%
32
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 105
+0%
105
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+0%
23
+0%
Dota 2 61
+0%
61
+0%
Far Cry 5 97
+0%
97
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 86
+0%
86
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 91
+0%
91
+0%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
World of Tanks 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 34
+0%
34
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 19
+0%
19
+0%
Dota 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 76
+0%
76
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40
+0%
40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
World of Tanks 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 57
+0%
57
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 37
+0%
37
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.26 23.49
Recency 6 November 2008 6 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 60 Watt

FX 370 LP has 140% lower power consumption.

RTX 3050 6GB Mobile, on the other hand, has a 8934.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 712.5% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 370 LP in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 370 LP is a workstation card while GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile is a notebook 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 370 LP
Quadro FX 370 LP
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile

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 4 votes

Rate Quadro FX 370 LP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 705 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile 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.