Quadro FX 350M vs RADEON X600 SE
Quadro FX 350M
Popular choices:
RADEON X600 SE
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 350M is positioned at rank 228 and the RADEON X600 SE is on rank 354, so the Quadro FX 350M 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 350M
Performance Per Dollar RADEON X600 SE
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The RADEON X600 SE is significantly newer (2023 vs 2008). The RADEON X600 SE likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 350M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The RADEON X600 SE is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 8.9% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (512 MB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 350M.
| Insight | Quadro FX 350M | RADEON X600 SE |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-8.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+8.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (7nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the RADEON X600 SE 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 350M and RADEON X600 SE
Quadro FX 350M
The Quadro FX 350M 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: 45 points. Launch price was $3,499.
RADEON X600 SE
The RADEON X600 SE is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 8 2023. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1626 MHz to 2495 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 132W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. It features 28 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 49 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Quadro FX 350M scores 45 versus the RADEON X600 SE's 49 — the RADEON X600 SE leads by 8.9%. The Quadro FX 350M is built on Tesla 2.0 while the RADEON X600 SE uses RDNA 2.0, both on 55 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 350M) vs 1,792 (RADEON X600 SE). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 350M) vs 8.942 TFLOPS (RADEON X600 SE).
| Feature | Quadro FX 350M | RADEON X600 SE |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 45 | 49+9% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 7 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 1792+647% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 8.942 TFLOPS+1337% |
| ROPs | 32 | 64+100% |
| TMUs | 80 | 112+40% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 350M | RADEON X600 SE |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The Quadro FX 350M comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the RADEON X600 SE has 512 MB. The RADEON X600 SE offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Quadro FX 350M) vs 2 MB (RADEON X600 SE) — the RADEON X600 SE has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro FX 350M | RADEON X600 SE |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB | 0.5 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 350M draws 189W versus the RADEON X600 SE's 132W — a 35.5% difference. The RADEON X600 SE is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 350M) vs 350W (RADEON X600 SE). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.
| Feature | Quadro FX 350M | RADEON X600 SE |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W | 132W-30% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | 0mm | — |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 80 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.2 | 0.4+100% |
Value Analysis
The RADEON X600 SE is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2008).
| Feature | Quadro FX 350M | RADEON X600 SE |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $100 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $5 |
| Codename | GT200B | Navi 23 |
| Release | November 11 2008 | December 8 2023 |
| Ranking | #815 | #176 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro FX 350M and RADEON X600 SE
