Quadro CX vs Radeon R7 A265

CPU

GPU

Quadro CX

2008Core: 602 MHz

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Radeon R7 A265

2014Core: 725 MHzBoost: 825 MHz

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Quadro CX vs Radeon R7 A265 Performance Spectrum

Quadro CX

4 GB 150

947

0.0%

GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER

RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile

GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER

Radeon R7 A265

0.5 GB 30

994

+5.0%

Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire

Radeon RX 7600M

Radeon RX 6700S

Radeon RX 6700 XT

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.

Quadro CX vs Radeon R7 A265 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Quadro CX vs Radeon R7 A265: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

Quadro CX

2008

Why buy it

✅45.3% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅700% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 512 MB).

Trade-offs

❌2008 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
1241.6% HIGHER MSRP
$1,999 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.5 vs 6.7 G3D/$ ($1,999 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌400% higher power demand at 150W vs 30W.

Radeon R7 A265

2014

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,850 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $1,999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1308.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 6.7 vs 0.5 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $1,999 MSRP).
✅Draws 30W instead of 150W, a 120W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro CX across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 512 MB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2014 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Quadro CX is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 45.3% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. PassMark G3D leans toward Radeon R7 A265 instead at 994 vs 947, so for this question the real-game FPS result matters more than the synthetic split.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Quadro CX is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 4 GB vs 512 MB of VRAM. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon R7 A265 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $1,850 cheaper on MSRP at $149 vs $1,999, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 1308.2% (6.7 vs 0.5), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, Radeon R7 A265 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, Quadro CX has the stronger long-term case.

Quadro CX vs Radeon R7 A265 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Quadro CX

The Quadro CX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 947 points. Launch price was $1,999.

Radeon R7 A265

The Radeon R7 A265 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 9 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 725 MHz to 825 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 994 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the Quadro CX scores 947 versus the Radeon R7 A265's 994 — the Radeon R7 A265 leads by 5%. The Quadro CX is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Radeon R7 A265 uses GCN 1.0, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 192 (Quadro CX) vs 384 (Radeon R7 A265). Raw compute: 0.4623 TFLOPS (Quadro CX) vs 0.6336 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 A265).

Feature	Quadro CX	Radeon R7 A265
G3D Mark Score	947	994+5%
Architecture	Tesla 2.0	GCN 1.0
Process Node	55 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	192	384+100%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.4623 TFLOPS	0.6336 TFLOPS+37%
ROPs	24+200%	8
TMUs	64+167%	24
L2 Cache	192 KB	256 KB+33%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro CX	Radeon R7 A265
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro CX has 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R7 A265 carries 512 MB. Quadro CX gives you 700% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the Quadro CX and 128-bit on the Radeon R7 A265. L2 Cache: 192 KB (Quadro CX) vs 256 KB (Radeon R7 A265) — the Radeon R7 A265 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro CX	Radeon R7 A265
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+700%	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	192 KB	256 KB+33%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 11.1 (10_0) (Quadro CX) vs 12 (11_1) (Radeon R7 A265). Vulkan: N/A vs 1.1. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

Feature	Quadro CX	Radeon R7 A265
DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (11_1)+8%
Vulkan	N/A	1.1
OpenGL	3.3	4.5+36%
Max Displays	2	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: None (Quadro CX) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon R7 A265). Decoder: PureVideo HD vs UVD 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro CX) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Radeon R7 A265).

Feature	Quadro CX	Radeon R7 A265
Encoder	None	VCE 1.0
Decoder	PureVideo HD	UVD 4.0
Codecs	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro CX draws 150W versus the Radeon R7 A265's 30W — a 133.3% difference. The Radeon R7 A265 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro CX) vs 350W (Radeon R7 A265). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 75.

Feature	Quadro CX	Radeon R7 A265
TDP	150W	30W-80%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	267mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	80	75-6%
Perf/Watt	6.3	33.1+425%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Quadro CX came in at $1999, while the Radeon R7 A265 launched at $149. On MSRP, Radeon R7 A265 was 92.5% cheaper ($1850 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 0.5 (Quadro CX) vs 6.7 (Radeon R7 A265) — the Radeon R7 A265 offers 1240% better value. The newer card here is Radeon R7 A265 (2014 vs 2008).

Feature	Quadro CX	Radeon R7 A265
MSRP	$1999	$149-93%
Performance per Dollar	0.5	6.7+1240%
Codename	GT200B	Opal
Release	November 11 2008	January 9 2014
Ranking	#901	#890

Search Quadro CX on Amazon

Search Radeon R7 A265 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.