Quadro FX 370M vs Radeon HD 3000
Quadro FX 370M
Popular choices:
Radeon HD 3000
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 370M is positioned at rank 354 and the Radeon HD 3000 is on rank 316, so the Radeon HD 3000 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 370M
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 3000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon HD 3000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.2% 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 370M.
| Insight | Quadro FX 370M | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon HD 3000 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 370M and Radeon HD 3000
Quadro FX 370M
The Quadro FX 370M 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: 93 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Radeon HD 3000
The Radeon HD 3000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 1 2011. It features the TeraScale 3 architecture. The core clock speed is 750 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 186W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 96 points. Launch price was $180.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro FX 370M scores 93 and the Radeon HD 3000 reaches 96 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 370M is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Radeon HD 3000 uses TeraScale 3, both on 55 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 370M) vs 1,280 (Radeon HD 3000). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 370M) vs 1.92 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 3000).
| Feature | Quadro FX 370M | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 93 | 96+3% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | TeraScale 3 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 1280+433% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 1.92 TFLOPS+209% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 80 |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 370M | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 370M comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon HD 3000 has 512 MB. The Radeon HD 3000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Quadro FX 370M) vs 512 KB (Radeon HD 3000) — the Radeon HD 3000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro FX 370M | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB | 0.5 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 370M draws 189W versus the Radeon HD 3000's 186W — a 1.6% difference. The Radeon HD 3000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 370M) vs 350W (Radeon HD 3000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin.
| Feature | Quadro FX 370M | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W | 186W-2% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | — | 1mm |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Perf/Watt | 0.5 | 0.5 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon HD 3000 is the newer GPU (2011 vs 2008).
| Feature | Quadro FX 370M | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $50 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $10 |
| Codename | GT200B | Cayman |
| Release | November 11 2008 | December 1 2011 |
| Ranking | #815 | #598 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro FX 370M and Radeon HD 3000
