ATI Radeon 9000 PRO vs Quadro FX 380

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1250not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency0.84no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameG96RV250
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date30 March 2009 (15 years ago)1 July 2002 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$129 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores16no data
Core clock speed450 MHz275 MHz
Number of transistors314 million36 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)34 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate3.6001.100
Floating-point processing power0.0352 TFLOPSno data
ROPs84
TMUs84

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16AGP 4x
Length198 mmno data
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR3DDR
Maximum RAM amount256 MB64 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz275 MHz
Memory bandwidth22.4 GB/s8.8 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)8.1
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.31.4
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 30 March 2009 1 July 2002
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 64 MB
Chip lithography 65 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 34 Watt 28 Watt

FX 380 has an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 130.8% more advanced lithography process.

ATI 9000 PRO, on the other hand, has 21.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro FX 380 and Radeon 9000 PRO. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro FX 380 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon 9000 PRO is a desktop 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 380
Quadro FX 380
ATI Radeon 9000 PRO
Radeon 9000 PRO

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.9 15 votes

Rate Quadro FX 380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 13 votes

Rate Radeon 9000 PRO 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.