Quadro FX 1000 vs RADEON 9550

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 FX 1000 vs RADEON 9550 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 FX 1000 vs RADEON 9550: 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 FX 1000

2008

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 128 MB vs 256 MB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2008 hardware with 128 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
287.6% HIGHER MSRP
$500 MSRPvs$129 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.1 vs 0.3 G3D/$ ($500 MSRP vs $129 MSRP).
❌278% higher power demand at 189W vs 50W.

RADEON 9550

2017

Why buy it

✅Costs $371 less on MSRP ($129 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Delivers 299% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 0.3 vs 0.1 G3D/$ ($129 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (256 MB vs 128 MB).
✅Draws 50W instead of 189W, a 139W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌2017 hardware with 256 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?

RADEON 9550 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 2.9% in PassMark G3D (35 vs 34), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

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

Quadro FX 1000 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond because it comes out ahead on the available hardware-headroom signals for this matchup.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

RADEON 9550 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $371 cheaper on MSRP at $129 vs $500, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 299% (0.3 vs 0.1), so the value case lines up with the gaming result. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, RADEON 9550 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, Quadro FX 1000 has the stronger long-term case.

Quadro FX 1000 vs RADEON 9550 Technical Specifications

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

Quadro FX 1000

The Quadro FX 1000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 610 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 189W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 34 points. Launch price was $3,499.

RADEON 9550

The RADEON 9550 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 20 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1100 MHz to 1183 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 35 points. Launch price was $79.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro FX 1000 scores 34 and the RADEON 9550 reaches 35 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 1000 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the RADEON 9550 uses GCN 4.0, both on 55 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 1000) vs 512 (RADEON 9550). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 1000) vs 1.211 TFLOPS (RADEON 9550).

Feature	Quadro FX 1000	RADEON 9550
G3D Mark Score	34	35+3%
Architecture	Tesla 2.0	GCN 4.0
Process Node	55 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	240	512+113%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.6221 TFLOPS	1.211 TFLOPS+95%
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	80+150%	32
L2 Cache	256 KB	256 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro FX 1000	RADEON 9550
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 FX 1000 has 128 MB of VRAM, while the RADEON 9550 carries 256 MB. RADEON 9550 gives you 100% 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 FX 1000 and 64-bit on the RADEON 9550.

Feature	Quadro FX 1000	RADEON 9550
VRAM Capacity	0.125 GB	0.25 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	256 KB	256 KB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro FX 1000 draws 189W versus the RADEON 9550's 50W — a 116.3% difference. The RADEON 9550 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 1000) vs 350W (RADEON 9550). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.

Feature	Quadro FX 1000	RADEON 9550
TDP	189W	50W-74%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Legacy
Perf/Watt	0.2	0.7+250%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Quadro FX 1000 came in at $500, while the RADEON 9550 launched at $129. On MSRP, RADEON 9550 was 74.2% cheaper ($371 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 0.1 (Quadro FX 1000) vs 0.3 (RADEON 9550) — the RADEON 9550 offers 200% better value. The newer card here is RADEON 9550 (2017 vs 2008).

Feature	Quadro FX 1000	RADEON 9550
MSRP	$500	$129-74%
Performance per Dollar	0.1	0.3+200%
Codename	GT200B	Lexa
Release	November 11 2008	April 20 2017
Ranking	#815	#668

Search Quadro FX 1000 on Amazon

Search RADEON 9550 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.