Quadro 410 vs RADEON HD6410D
Quadro 410
Popular choices:
RADEON HD6410D
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 RADEON HD6410D is on rank 340, so the Quadro 410 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 RADEON HD6410D
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The RADEON HD6410D is significantly newer (2023 vs 2013). The RADEON HD6410D likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro 410 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro 410 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the RADEON HD6410D.
| Insight | Quadro 410 | RADEON HD6410D |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (5nm) |
| 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 RADEON HD6410D offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $5 versus $25 for the Quadro 410, it costs 80% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 395.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro 410 | RADEON HD6410D |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+395.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($25) | ✅More affordable ($5) |
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 RADEON HD6410D
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.
RADEON HD6410D
The RADEON HD6410D is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 3 2023. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 400 MHz to 2200 MHz. It has 128 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 2 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 423 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro 410 scores 427 and the RADEON HD6410D reaches 423 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro 410 is built on Kepler while the RADEON HD6410D uses RDNA 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 1,152 (Quadro 410) vs 128 (RADEON HD6410D). Raw compute: 1.627 TFLOPS (Quadro 410) vs 0.5632 TFLOPS (RADEON HD6410D).
| Feature | Quadro 410 | RADEON HD6410D |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 427 | 423 |
| Architecture | Kepler | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 1152+800% | 128 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.627 TFLOPS+189% | 0.5632 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+700% | 4 |
| TMUs | 96+1100% | 8 |
| L1 Cache | 96 KB+200% | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 2 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro 410 | RADEON HD6410D |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (Quadro 410) vs 2 MB (RADEON HD6410D) — the RADEON HD6410D has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro 410 | RADEON HD6410D |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 2 MB+300% |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro 410 draws 100W versus the RADEON HD6410D's 15W — a 147.8% difference. The RADEON HD6410D is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro 410) vs 350W (RADEON HD6410D). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.
| Feature | Quadro 410 | RADEON HD6410D |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 15W-85% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Perf/Watt | 4.3 | 28.2+556% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro 410 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $25, while the RADEON HD6410D launched at $35 and now averages $5. The RADEON HD6410D costs 80% less ($20 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 17.1 (Quadro 410) vs 84.6 (RADEON HD6410D) — the RADEON HD6410D offers 394.7% better value. The RADEON HD6410D is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2013).
| Feature | Quadro 410 | RADEON HD6410D |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | $35-77% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $25 | $5-80% |
| Performance per Dollar | 17.1 | 84.6+395% |
| Codename | GK104 | Dragon Range |
| Release | July 23 2013 | January 3 2023 |
| Ranking | #604 | #843 |
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 RADEON HD6410D
