GeForce GT625M vs Quadro 410
GeForce GT625M
Popular choices:
Quadro 410
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce GT625M is positioned at rank 195 and the Quadro 410 is on rank 251, so the GeForce GT625M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT625M
Performance Per Dollar Quadro 410
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro 410 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GT625M.
| Insight | GeForce GT625M | Quadro 410 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro 410 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro 410 holds the technical lead. Priced at $25 (vs $45), it costs 44% less, resulting in a 82.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GT625M | Quadro 410 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+82.1%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($45) | ✅More affordable ($25) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GT625M and Quadro 410
GeForce GT625M
The GeForce GT625M 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: 422 points.
Quadro 410
The Quadro 410 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 706 MHz. It has 1152 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 427 points. Launch price was $1,499.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GT625M scores 422 and the Quadro 410 reaches 427 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GT625M is built on Kepler while the Quadro 410 uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GT625M) vs 1,152 (Quadro 410). Raw compute: 0.7296 TFLOPS (GeForce GT625M) vs 1.627 TFLOPS (Quadro 410).
| Feature | GeForce GT625M | Quadro 410 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 422 | 427+1% |
| Architecture | Kepler | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 1152+200% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7296 TFLOPS | 1.627 TFLOPS+123% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 32 | 96+200% |
| L1 Cache | 32 KB | 96 KB+200% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GT625M | Quadro 410 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (GeForce GT625M) vs 512 KB (Quadro 410) — the Quadro 410 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GT625M | Quadro 410 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GT625M draws 45W versus the Quadro 410's 100W — a 75.9% difference. The GeForce GT625M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GT625M) vs 350W (Quadro 410). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce GT625M | Quadro 410 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 45W-55% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | PCIe-powered |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 9.4+119% | 4.3 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro 410 costs 44.4% less ($20 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 9.4 (GeForce GT625M) vs 17.1 (Quadro 410) — the Quadro 410 offers 81.9% better value. The Quadro 410 is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2012).
| Feature | GeForce GT625M | Quadro 410 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $149 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $45 | $25-44% |
| Performance per Dollar | 9.4 | 17.1+82% |
| Codename | GK107 | GK104 |
| Release | March 22 2012 | July 23 2013 |
| Ranking | #828 | #604 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GT625M and Quadro 410
