Radeon HD 8650M vs Quadro FX 580

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 580 with Radeon HD 8650M, including specs and performance data.


FX 580
2009, $199
512 MB GDDR3, 40 Watt
0.46

HD 8650M outperforms FX 580 by a whopping 304% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1313957
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency0.89no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)GCN (2012−2015)
GPU code nameG96Cno data
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date9 April 2009 (17 years ago)7 January 2013 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores32384
Core clock speed450 MHz650 MHz
Number of transistors314 million900 Million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)40 Wattno data
Texture fill rate7.200no data
Floating-point processing power0.072 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs16no data
L2 Cache32 KBno 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 datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz4500 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.1
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.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 49 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.46 1.86
Recency 9 April 2009 7 January 2013
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm

HD 8650M has a 304% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 96% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 8650M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 580 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 580 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 8650M is a notebook one.

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.


3.3 97 votes

Rate Quadro FX 580 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 13 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8650M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 580 or Radeon HD 8650M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.