Quadro FX 370 vs GeForce 9300M G
Quadro FX 370
Popular choices:
GeForce 9300M G
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 370 is positioned at rank 373 and the GeForce 9300M G is on rank 594, so the Quadro FX 370 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 370
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9300M G
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 9300M G is significantly newer (2015 vs 2008). The GeForce 9300M G likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 370 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 9300M G is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 370.
| Insight | Quadro FX 370 | GeForce 9300M G |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| 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
The GeForce 9300M G offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce 9300M G holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $500), it costs 94% less, resulting in a 1586.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro FX 370 | GeForce 9300M G |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1586.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500) | ✅More affordable ($30) |
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 370 and GeForce 9300M G
Quadro FX 370
The Quadro FX 370 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: 84 points. Launch price was $3,499.
GeForce 9300M G
The GeForce 9300M G is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 549 MHz to 549 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 85 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro FX 370 scores 84 and the GeForce 9300M G reaches 85 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 370 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the GeForce 9300M G uses Maxwell, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 370) vs 384 (GeForce 9300M G). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 370) vs 0.4216 TFLOPS (GeForce 9300M G).
| Feature | Quadro FX 370 | GeForce 9300M G |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 84 | 85+1% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 384+60% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS+48% | 0.4216 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+300% | 8 |
| TMUs | 80+233% | 24 |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 370 | GeForce 9300M G |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 256 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Quadro FX 370) vs 1 MB (GeForce 9300M G) — the GeForce 9300M G has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro FX 370 | GeForce 9300M G |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB | 0.25 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.0 (Quadro FX 370) vs 10.0 (GeForce 9300M G). Vulkan: N/A vs None. OpenGL: 2.1 vs 2.1. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 1.
| Feature | Quadro FX 370 | GeForce 9300M G |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.0 | 10.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | None |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 2.1 |
| Max Displays | 2+100% | 1 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (Quadro FX 370) vs No (GeForce 9300M G). Decoder: PureVideo 2 vs PureVideo HD VP2. Supported codecs: MPEG-2 (Quadro FX 370) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (GeForce 9300M G).
| Feature | Quadro FX 370 | GeForce 9300M G |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | No |
| Decoder | PureVideo 2 | PureVideo HD VP2 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2 | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 370 draws 189W versus the GeForce 9300M G's 33W — a 140.5% difference. The GeForce 9300M G is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 370) vs 350W (GeForce 9300M G). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Card length: 168mm vs 0mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Quadro FX 370 | GeForce 9300M G |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W | 33W-83% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | 168mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 0.4 | 2.6+550% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro FX 370 launched at $129 MSRP and currently averages $500, while the GeForce 9300M G launched at $30 and now averages $30. The GeForce 9300M G costs 94% less ($470 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.2 (Quadro FX 370) vs 2.8 (GeForce 9300M G) — the GeForce 9300M G offers 1300% better value. The GeForce 9300M G is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2008).
| Feature | Quadro FX 370 | GeForce 9300M G |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $129 | $30-77% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $500 | $30-94% |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.2 | 2.8+1300% |
| Codename | GT200B | GM108 |
| Release | November 11 2008 | March 13 2015 |
| Ranking | #815 | #880 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro FX 370 and GeForce 9300M G
