ATI Radeon X1650 SE vs Quadro T500 Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro T500 Mobile with Radeon X1650 SE, including specs and performance data.

T500 Mobile
2020
2 GB GDDR6, 18 Watt
8.25
+4753%

T500 Mobile outperforms X1650 SE by a whopping 4753% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5551475
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency35.290.48
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Ultra-Threaded SE (2005−2007)
GPU code nameTU117RV515
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date2 December 2020 (5 years ago)2007 (19 years ago)

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 cores896no data
Core clock speed1365 MHz635 MHz
Boost clock speed1695 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,700 million107 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt27 Watt
Texture fill rate94.922.540
Floating-point processing power3.037 TFLOPSno data
ROPs324
TMUs564
L1 Cache896 KBno data
L2 Cache1024 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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR6DDR2
Maximum RAM amount2 GB512 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz800 MBps
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s12.8 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model6.63.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL3.0N/A
Vulkan1.2N/A
CUDA7.5-

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 HD360−1
1440p15-0−1
4K17-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 35−40 0−1
Far Cry 5 30 0−1
Fortnite 50−55
+5000%
1−2
−5000%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 24−27 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33 0−1
Valorant 80−85
+8300%
1−2
−8300%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 35−40 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+6400%
2−3
−6400%
Dota 2 90
+8900%
1−2
−8900%
Far Cry 5 28 0−1
Fortnite 50−55
+5000%
1−2
−5000%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 24−27 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 31 0−1
Metro Exodus 16−18 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28 0−1
Valorant 80−85
+8300%
1−2
−8300%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40 0−1
Dota 2 75
+7400%
1−2
−7400%
Far Cry 5 27 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 35−40 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19 0−1

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
+5000%
1−2
−5000%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 60−65
+6300%
1−2
−6300%
Grand Theft Auto V 13 0−1
Metro Exodus 9−10 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14 0−1
Valorant 90−95
+9200%
1−2
−9200%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20 0−1
Far Cry 5 16−18 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 20−22 0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 16−18 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14 0−1
Metro Exodus 4−5 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9 0−1
Valorant 40−45 0−1

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 9−10 0−1
Dota 2 28 0−1
Far Cry 5 8−9 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 14−16 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 8−9 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.25 0.17
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 12 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 27 Watt

T500 Mobile has a 4753% higher aggregate performance score, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 650% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T500 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1650 SE in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro T500 Mobile is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon X1650 SE is a desktop 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.


3.2 113 votes

Rate Quadro T500 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Radeon X1650 SE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro T500 Mobile or Radeon X1650 SE, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.