Quadro FX 2500M vs Radeon R3E
Quadro FX 2500M
Popular choices:
Radeon R3E
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. The Quadro FX 2500M is positioned at rank #282 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 2500M
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon R3E is significantly newer (2019 vs 2008). The Radeon R3E likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 2500M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R3E is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 2500M.
| Insight | Quadro FX 2500M | Radeon R3E |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) (14nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon R3E 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 2500M and Radeon R3E
Quadro FX 2500M
The Quadro FX 2500M 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: 218 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Radeon R3E
The Radeon R3E is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 13 2019. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1082 MHz to 1218 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 225 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro FX 2500M scores 218 and the Radeon R3E reaches 225 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 2500M is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Radeon R3E uses GCN 4.0, both on 55 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 2500M) vs 512 (Radeon R3E). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 2500M) vs 1.247 TFLOPS (Radeon R3E).
| Feature | Quadro FX 2500M | Radeon R3E |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 218 | 225+3% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 512+113% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 1.247 TFLOPS+100% |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 80+150% | 32 |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 2500M | Radeon R3E |
|---|---|---|
| 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 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Quadro FX 2500M) vs 512 KB (Radeon R3E) — the Radeon R3E has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro FX 2500M | Radeon R3E |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 2500M draws 189W versus the Radeon R3E's 50W — a 116.3% difference. The Radeon R3E is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 2500M) vs 350W (Radeon R3E). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro FX 2500M | Radeon R3E |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W | 50W-74% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 1mm |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Perf/Watt | 1.2 | 4.5+275% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R3E is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2008).
| Feature | Quadro FX 2500M | Radeon R3E |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $0 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $49 |
| Codename | GT200B | Polaris 23 |
| Release | November 11 2008 | May 13 2019 |
| Ranking | #815 | #757 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro FX 2500M and Radeon R3E
