Quadro FX 1600M vs RADEON HD7450
Quadro FX 1600M
Popular choices:
RADEON HD7450
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 FX 1600M is positioned at rank 298 and the RADEON HD7450 is on rank 259, so the RADEON HD7450 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 1600M
Performance Per Dollar RADEON HD7450
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The RADEON HD7450 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 1600M.
| Insight | Quadro FX 1600M | RADEON HD7450 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the RADEON HD7450 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 FX 1600M and RADEON HD7450
Quadro FX 1600M
The Quadro FX 1600M 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: 195 points. Launch price was $3,499.
RADEON HD7450
The RADEON HD7450 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 31 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1250 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 199 points. Launch price was $449.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro FX 1600M scores 195 and the RADEON HD7450 reaches 199 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 1600M is built on Tesla 2.0 while the RADEON HD7450 uses GCN 1.0, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 1600M) vs 1,792 (RADEON HD7450). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 1600M) vs 2.867 TFLOPS (RADEON HD7450).
| Feature | Quadro FX 1600M | RADEON HD7450 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 195 | 199+2% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 1792+647% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 2.867 TFLOPS+361% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 112+40% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 768 KB+200% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 1600M | RADEON HD7450 |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 256 KB (Quadro FX 1600M) vs 768 KB (RADEON HD7450) — the RADEON HD7450 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro FX 1600M | RADEON HD7450 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 768 KB+200% |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 1600M draws 189W versus the RADEON HD7450's 200W — a 5.7% difference. The Quadro FX 1600M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 1600M) vs 350W (RADEON HD7450). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.
| Feature | Quadro FX 1600M | RADEON HD7450 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W-6% | 200W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | — | 168mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Perf/Watt | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Value Analysis
The RADEON HD7450 is the newer GPU (2012 vs 2008).
| Feature | Quadro FX 1600M | RADEON HD7450 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $50 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $15 |
| Codename | GT200B | Tahiti |
| Release | November 11 2008 | January 31 2012 |
| Ranking | #815 | #454 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro FX 1600M and RADEON HD7450
