Quadro FX 380M vs Radeon HD 4250
Quadro FX 380M
Popular choices:
Radeon HD 4250
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 380M is positioned at rank 161 and the Radeon HD 4250 is on rank 299, so the Quadro FX 380M 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 380M
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 4250
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon HD 4250 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.7% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 380M.
| Insight | Quadro FX 380M | Radeon HD 4250 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) |
| 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 HD 4250 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 380M and Radeon HD 4250
Quadro FX 380M
The Quadro FX 380M 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: 121 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Radeon HD 4250
The Radeon HD 4250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 25 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 110W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 123 points. Launch price was $199.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro FX 380M scores 121 and the Radeon HD 4250 reaches 123 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 380M is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Radeon HD 4250 uses TeraScale, both on a 55 nm process. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 380M) vs 800 (Radeon HD 4250). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 380M) vs 1 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 4250).
| Feature | Quadro FX 380M | Radeon HD 4250 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 121 | 123+2% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | TeraScale |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 800+233% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 1 TFLOPS+61% |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 80+100% | 40 |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 380M | Radeon HD 4250 |
|---|---|---|
| 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.
| Feature | Quadro FX 380M | Radeon HD 4250 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.1 (FL10_1) (Quadro FX 380M) vs 10.1 (Radeon HD 4250). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Quadro FX 380M | Radeon HD 4250 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.1 (FL10_1)+10% | 10.1 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VP4 (Quadro FX 380M) vs UVD 2 (Radeon HD 4250). Decoder: VP4 vs UVD 2.
| Feature | Quadro FX 380M | Radeon HD 4250 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VP4 | UVD 2 |
| Decoder | VP4 | UVD 2 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 | — |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 380M draws 189W versus the Radeon HD 4250's 110W — a 52.8% difference. The Radeon HD 4250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 380M) vs 350W (Radeon HD 4250). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 0mm vs 1mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Quadro FX 380M | Radeon HD 4250 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W | 110W-42% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 0mm | 1mm |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.6 | 1.1+83% |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro FX 380M and Radeon HD 4250
