
Quadro 600
Popular choices:

Radeon R5 330
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 600 is positioned at rank 249 and the Radeon R5 330 is on rank 435, so the Quadro 600 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro 600
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R5 330
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R5 330 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.2% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (2 GB vs 1 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro 600.
| Insight | Quadro 600 | Radeon R5 330 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro 600 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro 600 holds the technical lead. Priced at $20 (vs $45), it costs 56% less, resulting in a 124.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro 600 | Radeon R5 330 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+124.6%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($20) | ⚠️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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro 600 and Radeon R5 330

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.

Radeon R5 330
The Radeon R5 330 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 18 2017. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 730 MHz to 1024 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 523 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro 600 scores 522 and the Radeon R5 330 reaches 523 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro 600 is built on Pascal while the Radeon R5 330 uses GCN 3.0, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (Quadro 600) vs 384 (Radeon R5 330). Raw compute: 1.244 TFLOPS (Quadro 600) vs 0.7864 TFLOPS (Radeon R5 330). Boost clocks: 1620 MHz vs 1024 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro 600 | Radeon R5 330 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 522 | 523 |
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 3.0 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.244 TFLOPS+58% | 0.7864 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1620 MHz+58% | 1024 MHz |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 24 | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 144 KB+50% | 96 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+669% | 0.13 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro 600 | Radeon R5 330 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The Quadro 600 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R5 330 has 2 GB. The Radeon R5 330 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Quadro 600) vs 0.13 MB (Radeon R5 330) — the Quadro 600 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro 600 | Radeon R5 330 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 2 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+669% | 0.13 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro 600 draws 40W versus the Radeon R5 330's 50W — a 22.2% difference. The Quadro 600 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro 600) vs 350W (Radeon R5 330). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro 600 | Radeon R5 330 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 40W-20% | 50W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 168mm |
| Height | — | 69mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Perf/Watt | 13.1+25% | 10.5 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro 600 launched at $179 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the Radeon R5 330 launched at $81 and now averages $45. The Quadro 600 costs 55.6% less ($25 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 26.1 (Quadro 600) vs 11.6 (Radeon R5 330) — the Quadro 600 offers 125% better value.
| Feature | Quadro 600 | Radeon R5 330 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $179 | $81-55% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20-56% | $45 |
| Performance per Dollar | 26.1+125% | 11.6 |
| Codename | GP107 | Weston |
| Release | February 7 2017 | April 18 2017 |
| Ranking | #558 | #873 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













