Radeon HD 6490M vs Quadro FX 570M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro FX 570M with Radeon HD 6490M, including specs and performance data.
HD 6490M outperforms 570M by a whopping 275% 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 | 1436 | 1186 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.01 |
| Power efficiency | 0.41 | no data |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | G84 | Seymour |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 June 2007 (18 years ago) | 4 January 2011 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $1,193.03 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 | 32 | 160 |
| Core clock speed | 475 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 289 million | 370 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 80 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 7.600 | 6.400 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.0608 TFLOPS | 0.256 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 4 |
| TMUs | 16 | 8 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 16 KB |
| L2 Cache | 32 KB | 128 KB |
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 | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 22.4 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |
| 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
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 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.
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
−280%
| 19
+280%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 62.79 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−20%
|
30−33
+20%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
−76.9%
|
21−24
+76.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 9−10
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−20%
|
30−33
+20%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 9−10
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−20%
|
30−33
+20%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−233%
|
10−11
+233%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
High
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
This is how FX 570M and HD 6490M compete in popular games:
- HD 6490M is 280% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the HD 6490M is 300% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD 6490M performs better in 24 tests (69%)
- there's a draw in 11 tests (31%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.24 | 0.90 |
| Recency | 1 June 2007 | 4 January 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 80 nm | 40 nm |
HD 6490M has a 275% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon HD 6490M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 570M in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro FX 570M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 6490M 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.
