ATI Radeon Xpress 1250 vs Quadro FX 3700M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro FX 3700M with Radeon Xpress 1250, including specs and performance data.
FX 3700M outperforms ATI Xpress 1250 by a whopping 927% 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 | 1088 | 1464 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.02 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.07 | no data |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | R400 (2004−2008) |
| GPU code name | G92 | RS690 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 14 August 2008 (16 years ago) | 28 February 2007 (18 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $925 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 | 128 | 4 |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 400 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 754 million | 120 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 80 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 35.20 | 1.600 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.352 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 4 |
| TMUs | 64 | 4 |
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 |
| Interface | MXM-HE | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| 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 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | + |
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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 9.0b (9_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | no data |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 2.0 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | - |
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.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+33.3%
|
24−27
−33.3%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
+160%
|
10−11
−160%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
+87.5%
|
8−9
−87.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+33.3%
|
24−27
−33.3%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
+87.5%
|
8−9
−87.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+33.3%
|
24−27
−33.3%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Valorant | 2−3 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the FX 3700M is 500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- FX 3700M is ahead in 26 tests (87%)
- there's a draw in 4 tests (13%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.13 | 0.11 |
| Recency | 14 August 2008 | 28 February 2007 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 80 nm |
FX 3700M has a 927.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 23.1% more advanced lithography process.
The Quadro FX 3700M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Xpress 1250 in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro FX 3700M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon Xpress 1250 is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
