Quadro 410 vs GeForce GT625M
Quadro 410
Popular choices:
GeForce GT625M
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 Quadro 410 is positioned at rank 251 and the GeForce GT625M is on rank 195, 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 Quadro 410
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT625M
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 | Quadro 410 | GeForce GT625M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| 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
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 | Quadro 410 | GeForce GT625M |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+82.1%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($25) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($45) |
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 Quadro 410 and GeForce GT625M
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.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro 410 scores 427 and the GeForce GT625M reaches 422 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro 410 is built on Kepler while the GeForce GT625M uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,152 (Quadro 410) vs 384 (GeForce GT625M). Raw compute: 1.627 TFLOPS (Quadro 410) vs 0.7296 TFLOPS (GeForce GT625M).
| Feature | Quadro 410 | GeForce GT625M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 427+1% | 422 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1152+200% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.627 TFLOPS+123% | 0.7296 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 96+200% | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 96 KB+200% | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro 410 | GeForce GT625M |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (Quadro 410) vs 256 KB (GeForce GT625M) — the Quadro 410 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro 410 | GeForce GT625M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro 410 draws 100W versus the GeForce GT625M's 45W — a 75.9% difference. The GeForce GT625M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro 410) vs 350W (GeForce GT625M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.
| Feature | Quadro 410 | GeForce GT625M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 45W-55% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 4.3 | 9.4+119% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro 410 costs 44.4% less ($20 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 17.1 (Quadro 410) vs 9.4 (GeForce GT625M) — the Quadro 410 offers 81.9% better value. The Quadro 410 is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2012).
| Feature | Quadro 410 | GeForce GT625M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $25-44% | $45 |
| Performance per Dollar | 17.1+82% | 9.4 |
| Codename | GK104 | GK107 |
| Release | July 23 2013 | March 22 2012 |
| Ranking | #604 | #828 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro 410 and GeForce GT625M
