GeForce GTS 250M vs Quadro 600
GeForce GTS 250M
Popular choices:
Quadro 600
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 GTS 250M is positioned at rank 84 and the Quadro 600 is on rank 249, so the GeForce GTS 250M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTS 250M
Performance Per Dollar Quadro 600
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Quadro 600 is significantly newer (2017 vs 2010). The Quadro 600 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTS 250M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro 600 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.4% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTS 250M.
| Insight | GeForce GTS 250M | Quadro 600 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro 600 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 GTS 250M and Quadro 600
GeForce GTS 250M
The GeForce GTS 250M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 13 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 783 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 106W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 520 points. Launch price was $129.
Quadro 600
The Quadro 600 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 7 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1430 MHz to 1620 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 40W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 522 points. Launch price was $178.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTS 250M scores 520 and the Quadro 600 reaches 522 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTS 250M is built on Fermi while the Quadro 600 uses Pascal, both on 40 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 192 (GeForce GTS 250M) vs 384 (Quadro 600). Raw compute: 0.6013 TFLOPS (GeForce GTS 250M) vs 1.244 TFLOPS (Quadro 600).
| Feature | GeForce GTS 250M | Quadro 600 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 520 | 522 |
| Architecture | Fermi | Pascal |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 384+100% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6013 TFLOPS | 1.244 TFLOPS+107% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 32+33% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB+78% | 144 KB |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTS 250M | Quadro 600 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 1 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (GeForce GTS 250M) vs 1 MB (Quadro 600) — the Quadro 600 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTS 250M | Quadro 600 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTS 250M draws 106W versus the Quadro 600's 40W — a 90.4% difference. The Quadro 600 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTS 250M) vs 350W (Quadro 600). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce GTS 250M | Quadro 600 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 106W | 40W-62% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | PCIe-powered |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 4.9 | 13.1+167% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro 600 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2010).
| Feature | GeForce GTS 250M | Quadro 600 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $179 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $20 |
| Codename | GF106 | GP107 |
| Release | September 13 2010 | February 7 2017 |
| Ranking | #791 | #558 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTS 250M and Quadro 600
