Quadro FX 370 vs Quadro FX 350
Quadro FX 370
Popular choices:
Quadro FX 350
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 Quadro FX 350 is on rank 385, 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 Quadro FX 350
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro FX 350 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.4% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro FX 370 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro FX 370 | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro FX 350 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro FX 350 holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $500), it costs 97% less, resulting in a 3312.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro FX 370 | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+3312.7%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500) | ✅More affordable ($15) |
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 Quadro FX 350
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.
Quadro FX 350
The Quadro FX 350 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: 86 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro FX 370 scores 84 and the Quadro FX 350 reaches 86 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 370 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Quadro FX 350 uses Tesla 2.0, both on a 55 nm process. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 370) vs 240 (Quadro FX 350). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 370) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 350).
| Feature | Quadro FX 370 | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 84 | 86+2% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 80 |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 370 | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The Quadro FX 370 comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 350 has 128 MB. The Quadro FX 370 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Quadro FX 370 | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB+100% | 0.125 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 370 draws 189W versus the Quadro FX 350's 189W — a 0% difference. The Quadro FX 350 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 370) vs 350W (Quadro FX 350). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro FX 370 | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W | 189W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 168mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.4 | 0.5+25% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro FX 370 launched at $129 MSRP and currently averages $500, while the Quadro FX 350 launched at $199 and now averages $15. The Quadro FX 350 costs 97% less ($485 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.2 (Quadro FX 370) vs 5.7 (Quadro FX 350) — the Quadro FX 350 offers 2750% better value.
| Feature | Quadro FX 370 | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $129-35% | $199 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $500 | $15-97% |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.2 | 5.7+2750% |
| Codename | GT200B | GT200B |
| Release | November 11 2008 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #815 | #815 |
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 Quadro FX 350
