Quadro FX 500/600 PCI vs RADEON A9800XT
Quadro FX 500/600 PCI
Popular choices:
RADEON A9800XT
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The RADEON A9800XT is significantly newer (2015 vs 2008). The RADEON A9800XT likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 500/600 PCI lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The RADEON A9800XT is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 64.3% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro FX 500/600 PCI offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro FX 500/600 PCI | RADEON A9800XT |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-64.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+64.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+700%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The RADEON A9800XT offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the RADEON A9800XT holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $500), it costs 94% less, resulting in a 2638.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro FX 500/600 PCI | RADEON A9800XT |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+2638.1%) |
| 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 500/600 PCI and RADEON A9800XT
Quadro FX 500/600 PCI
The Quadro FX 500/600 PCI 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: 14 points. Launch price was $3,499.
RADEON A9800XT
The RADEON A9800XT is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 19 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 970 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 23 points. Launch price was $229.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Quadro FX 500/600 PCI scores 14 versus the RADEON A9800XT's 23 — the RADEON A9800XT leads by 64.3%. The Quadro FX 500/600 PCI is built on Tesla 2.0 while the RADEON A9800XT uses GCN 3.0, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 500/600 PCI) vs 2,048 (RADEON A9800XT). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 500/600 PCI) vs 3.973 TFLOPS (RADEON A9800XT).
| Feature | Quadro FX 500/600 PCI | RADEON A9800XT |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 14 | 23+64% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | GCN 3.0 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 2048+753% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 3.973 TFLOPS+539% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 128+60% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 500/600 PCI | RADEON A9800XT |
|---|---|---|
| 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 500/600 PCI comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the RADEON A9800XT has 512 MB. The Quadro FX 500/600 PCI offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Quadro FX 500/600 PCI) vs 512 KB (RADEON A9800XT) — the RADEON A9800XT has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro FX 500/600 PCI | RADEON A9800XT |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+700% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 9_0a (Quadro FX 500/600 PCI) vs 9_0 (RADEON A9800XT). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Quadro FX 500/600 PCI | RADEON A9800XT |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 9_0a | 9_0 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 500/600 PCI draws 189W versus the RADEON A9800XT's 250W — a 27.8% difference. The Quadro FX 500/600 PCI is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 500/600 PCI) vs 350W (RADEON A9800XT). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Card length: 168mm vs 220mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | Quadro FX 500/600 PCI | RADEON A9800XT |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W-24% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | 168mm | 220mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Perf/Watt | 0.1 | 0.1 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro FX 500/600 PCI launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $500, while the RADEON A9800XT launched at $0 and now averages $30. The RADEON A9800XT costs 94% less ($470 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.0 (Quadro FX 500/600 PCI) vs 0.8 (RADEON A9800XT) — the RADEON A9800XT offers 100+% better value. The RADEON A9800XT is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2008).
| Feature | Quadro FX 500/600 PCI | RADEON A9800XT |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0 | $0 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $500 | $30-94% |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.0 | 0.8 |
| Codename | GT200B | Antigua |
| Release | November 11 2008 | November 19 2015 |
| Ranking | #815 | #394 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro FX 500/600 PCI and RADEON A9800XT
