Quadro FX 2000 vs RADEON 9600SE

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 2000 vs RADEON 9600SE 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 2000 vs RADEON 9600SE: 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 2000

2010

Why buy it

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

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (18 vs 27).
❌Less VRAM, with 128 MB vs 512 MB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2010 hardware with 128 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
4515.4% HIGHER MSRP
$3,000 MSRPvs$65 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.0 vs 0.4 G3D/$ ($3,000 MSRP vs $65 MSRP).

RADEON 9600SE

2025

Why buy it

✅+50% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Costs $2,935 less on MSRP ($65 MSRP vs $3,000 MSRP).
✅Delivers 6823.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 0.4 vs 0.0 G3D/$ ($65 MSRP vs $3,000 MSRP).
✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (512 MB vs 128 MB).
✅Better long-term bet: RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) on 4nm gives it a newer hardware base for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer clear downsides in this head-to-head, aside from the usual pricing and availability swings.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

RADEON 9600SE is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 50% in PassMark G3D (27 vs 18), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

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

RADEON 9600SE is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 512 MB vs 128 MB of VRAM, the newer upscaling stack, FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack, a 4nm process instead of 40nm, and 40 vs 0 ray-tracing units. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

RADEON 9600SE makes the most sense to buy today. It is $2,935 cheaper on MSRP at $65 vs $3,000, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 6823.1% (0.4 vs 0.0), so the value case lines up with the gaming result.

Quadro FX 2000 vs RADEON 9600SE Technical Specifications

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

Quadro FX 2000

The Quadro FX 2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 24 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 62W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 18 points. Launch price was $599.

RADEON 9600SE

The RADEON 9600SE is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 6 2025. It features the RDNA 3.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1295 MHz to 2900 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 40 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 27 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the Quadro FX 2000 scores 18 versus the RADEON 9600SE's 27 — the RADEON 9600SE leads by 50%. The Quadro FX 2000 is built on Fermi while the RADEON 9600SE uses RDNA 3.5, both on 40 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 192 (Quadro FX 2000) vs 2,560 (RADEON 9600SE). Raw compute: 0.48 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 2000) vs 14.85 TFLOPS (RADEON 9600SE).

Feature	Quadro FX 2000	RADEON 9600SE
G3D Mark Score	18	27+50%
Architecture	Fermi	RDNA 3.5
Process Node	40 nm	4 nm
Shading Units	192	2560+1233%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.48 TFLOPS	14.85 TFLOPS+2994%
ROPs	16	64+300%
TMUs	32	160+400%
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	8 MB+3100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro FX 2000	RADEON 9600SE
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 2000 has 128 MB of VRAM, while the RADEON 9600SE carries 512 MB. RADEON 9600SE gives you 300% 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 2000 and 64-bit on the RADEON 9600SE. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Quadro FX 2000) vs 8 MB (RADEON 9600SE) — the RADEON 9600SE has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro FX 2000	RADEON 9600SE
VRAM Capacity	0.125 GB	0.5 GB+300%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	8 MB+3100%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro FX 2000 draws 62W versus the RADEON 9600SE's 55W — a 12% difference. The RADEON 9600SE is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 2000) vs 350W (RADEON 9600SE). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.

Feature	Quadro FX 2000	RADEON 9600SE
TDP	62W	55W-11%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Legacy
Length	—	168mm
Height	—	111mm
Slots	—	1
Temp (Load)	—	60
Perf/Watt	0.3	0.5+67%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Quadro FX 2000 came in at $3000, while the RADEON 9600SE launched at $65. On MSRP, RADEON 9600SE was 97.8% cheaper ($2935 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 0.0 (Quadro FX 2000) vs 0.4 (RADEON 9600SE) — the RADEON 9600SE offers 100+% better value. The newer card here is RADEON 9600SE (2025 vs 2010).

Feature	Quadro FX 2000	RADEON 9600SE
MSRP	$3000	$65-98%
Performance per Dollar	0.0	0.4
Codename	GF106	Strix Halo
Release	December 24 2010	January 6 2025
Ranking	#902	#98

Search Quadro FX 2000 on Amazon

Search RADEON 9600SE 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.