Radeon HD 6250 vs Quadro FX 370
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro FX 370 with Radeon HD 6250, including specs and performance data.
HD 6250 outperforms FX 370 by a moderate 10% 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 | 1434 | 1417 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 0.44 | 0.88 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | G84 | Cedar |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 12 September 2007 (17 years ago) | 31 January 2011 (14 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.
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 | 16 | 80 |
| Core clock speed | 360 MHz | 650 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 289 million | 292 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 80 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 19 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 2.880 | 5.200 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.02304 TFLOPS | 0.104 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 4 |
| TMUs | 8 | 8 |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 198 mm | 168 mm |
| Width | 1-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 | DDR2 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 500 MHz | 500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 8 GB/s | 8 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 Connectors | 2x DVI | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | 1.1 | - |
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.
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.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 5−6
−20%
| 6
+20%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 25.80 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| God of War | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| God of War | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| God of War | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| God of War | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
This is how FX 370 and HD 6250 compete in popular games:
- HD 6250 is 20% faster in 1080p
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 25 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.20 | 0.22 |
| Recency | 12 September 2007 | 31 January 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 80 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 19 Watt |
HD 6250 has a 10% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 84.2% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro FX 370 and Radeon HD 6250.
Be aware that Quadro FX 370 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 6250 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.
