GeForce GT 625M vs Quadro FX 1800M

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

GeForce GT 625M vs Quadro FX 1800M FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce GT 625M vs Quadro FX 1800M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GeForce GT 625M

2012

Why buy it

✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (2 GB vs 1 GB).
✅Draws 45W instead of 189W, a 144W reduction.
✅More future proof: Kepler (2012−2018) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro FX 1800M across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌2012 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

Quadro FX 1800M

2008

Why buy it

✅51.6% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 1 GB vs 2 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2008 hardware with 1 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌320% higher power demand at 189W vs 45W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Quadro FX 1800M is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 51.6% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 0.2% in PassMark G3D (486 vs 485), so the answer here is pretty clean.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GT 625M is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 2 GB vs 1 GB of VRAM, a 28nm process instead of 55nm, and a newer 2012 generation instead of 2008. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Quadro FX 1800M makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, Quadro FX 1800M is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, GeForce GT 625M has the stronger long-term case.

GeForce GT 625M vs Quadro FX 1800M Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GeForce GT 625M

The GeForce GT 625M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 22 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from Up to 900 MHz to 950 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 45W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 485 points.

Quadro FX 1800M

The Quadro FX 1800M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 610 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 189W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 486 points. Launch price was $3,499.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GT 625M scores 485 and the Quadro FX 1800M reaches 486 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GT 625M is built on Kepler while the Quadro FX 1800M uses Tesla 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GT 625M) vs 240 (Quadro FX 1800M). Raw compute: 0.7296 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 625M) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 1800M).

Feature	GeForce GT 625M	Quadro FX 1800M
G3D Mark Score	485	486
Architecture	Kepler	Tesla 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	55 nm
Shading Units	384+60%	240
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.7296 TFLOPS+17%	0.6221 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	32+100%
TMUs	32	80+150%
L2 Cache	256 KB	256 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GT 625M gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Quadro FX 1800M leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce GT 625M	Quadro FX 1800M
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GT 625M has 2 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 1800M carries 1 GB. GeForce GT 625M gives you 100% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GT 625M and 64-bit on the Quadro FX 1800M.

Feature	GeForce GT 625M	Quadro FX 1800M
VRAM Capacity	2 GB+100%	1 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	256 KB	256 KB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 11.0 (GeForce GT 625M) vs 11.1 (10_1) (Quadro FX 1800M). Vulkan: None vs N/A. OpenGL: 4.0 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce GT 625M	Quadro FX 1800M
DirectX	11.0	11.1 (10_1)
Vulkan	None	N/A
OpenGL	4.0+21%	3.3
Max Displays	1	2+100%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: No (GeForce GT 625M) vs None (Quadro FX 1800M). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP5 vs PureVideo HD (VP4). Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 ASP (GeForce GT 625M) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (Quadro FX 1800M).

Feature	GeForce GT 625M	Quadro FX 1800M
Encoder	No	None
Decoder	PureVideo HD VP5	PureVideo HD (VP4)
Codecs	MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 ASP	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GT 625M draws 45W versus the Quadro FX 1800M's 189W — a 123.1% difference. The GeForce GT 625M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GT 625M) vs 350W (Quadro FX 1800M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 85.

Feature	GeForce GT 625M	Quadro FX 1800M
TDP	45W-76%	189W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	0mm	0mm
Height	0mm	0mm
Slots	0	0
Temp (Load)	75°C-12%	85
Perf/Watt	10.8+315%	2.6