Quadro FX 350 vs Quadro K600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K600 and Quadro FX 350, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro K600
2013
1 GB DDR3, 41 Watt
1.90
+764%

K600 outperforms FX 350 by a whopping 764% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9091372
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.26no data
Power efficiency3.180.72
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameGK107G72
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date1 March 2013 (11 years ago)20 April 2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 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 cores192no data
Core clock speed876 MHz550 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million112 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)41 Watt21 Watt
Texture fill rate14.022.200
Floating-point processing power0.3364 TFLOPSno data
ROPs162
TMUs164

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 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length160 mm168 mm
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 typeDDR3DDR2
Maximum RAM amount1 GB128 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed891 MHz405 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.51 GB/s6.48 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA3.0-

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Quadro K600 1.90
+764%
FX 350 0.22

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.

Quadro K600 731
+760%
FX 350 85

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.90 0.22
Recency 1 March 2013 20 April 2006
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 41 Watt 21 Watt

Quadro K600 has a 763.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

FX 350, on the other hand, has 95.2% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 350 in performance tests.


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 K600
Quadro K600
NVIDIA Quadro FX 350
Quadro FX 350

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.


2.8 198 votes

Rate Quadro K600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Quadro FX 350 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.