ATI Radeon 7500 vs Quadro M1000M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M1000M with Radeon 7500, including specs and performance data.

M1000M
2015
2 GB/4 GB GDDR5, 40 Watt
7.40
+73900%

M1000M outperforms ATI 7500 by a whopping 73900% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5311520
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.00no data
Power efficiency12.890.03
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameGM107RV200
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date18 August 2015 (9 years ago)14 August 2001 (23 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$200.89 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 cores512no data
Core clock speed993 MHz290 MHz
Boost clock speed1072 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million60 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)40 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate31.781.740
Floating-point processing power1.017 TFLOPSno data
ROPs162
TMUs326

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)AGP 4x
Widthno data1-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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount2 GB/4 GB64 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz230 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s7.36 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX127.0
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.51.3
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA5.0-

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.

M1000M 7.40
+73900%
ATI 7500 0.01

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.

M1000M 2853
+95000%
ATI 7500 3

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 HD39-0−1
4K13-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p5.15no data
4K15.45no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11 0−1
Battlefield 5 21−24 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 0−1
Far Cry 5 16−18 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 45−50 0−1
Hitman 3 14−16 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45 0−1
Metro Exodus 21−24 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11 0−1
Battlefield 5 21−24 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 0−1
Far Cry 5 16−18 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 45−50 0−1
Hitman 3 14−16 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45 0−1
Metro Exodus 21−24 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 62 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 0−1
Far Cry 5 16−18 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 45−50 0−1
Hitman 3 14−16 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 9−10 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 27−30 0−1
Hitman 3 10−12 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18 0−1
Metro Exodus 8−9 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6 0−1
Hitman 3 4−5 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27 0−1
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.40 0.01
Recency 18 August 2015 14 August 2001
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB/4 GB 64 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 40 Watt 23 Watt

M1000M has a 73900% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 435.7% more advanced lithography process.

ATI 7500, on the other hand, has 73.9% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M1000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 7500 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M1000M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon 7500 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 M1000M
Quadro M1000M
ATI Radeon 7500
Radeon 7500

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.


3.6 540 votes

Rate Quadro M1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 46 votes

Rate Radeon 7500 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.