Quadro FX 550 vs RADEON E2400

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.

Quadro FX 550 vs RADEON E2400 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Quadro FX 550 vs RADEON E2400: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

Quadro FX 550

2008

Why buy it

✅+23.1% higher PassMark G3D performance.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 128 MB vs 512 MB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2008 hardware with 128 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
50% HIGHER MSRP
$150 MSRPvs$100 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.4 vs 0.5 G3D/$ ($150 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
❌278% higher power demand at 189W vs 50W.

RADEON E2400

2017

Why buy it

✅Costs $50 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
✅Delivers 21.9% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 0.5 vs 0.4 G3D/$ ($100 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (512 MB vs 128 MB).
✅Draws 50W instead of 189W, a 139W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (52 vs 64).
❌2017 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Quadro FX 550 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 23.1% in PassMark G3D (64 vs 52), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Quadro FX 550 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond because it comes out ahead on the available hardware-headroom signals for this matchup.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

RADEON E2400 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $50 cheaper on MSRP at $100 vs $150, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 21.9% (0.5 vs 0.4), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, RADEON E2400 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, Quadro FX 550 has the stronger long-term case.

Quadro FX 550 vs RADEON E2400 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Quadro FX 550

The Quadro FX 550 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: 64 points. Launch price was $3,499.

RADEON E2400

The RADEON E2400 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 20 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1183 MHz to 1124 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 52 points. Launch price was $79.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the Quadro FX 550 scores 64 versus the RADEON E2400's 52 — the Quadro FX 550 leads by 23.1%. The Quadro FX 550 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the RADEON E2400 uses GCN 4.0, both on 55 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 550) vs 384 (RADEON E2400). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 550) vs 0.9085 TFLOPS (RADEON E2400).

Feature	Quadro FX 550	RADEON E2400
G3D Mark Score	64+23%	52
Architecture	Tesla 2.0	GCN 4.0
Process Node	55 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	240	384+60%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.6221 TFLOPS	0.9085 TFLOPS+46%
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	80+233%	24
L2 Cache	256 KB	512 KB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro FX 550	RADEON E2400
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro FX 550 has 128 MB of VRAM, while the RADEON E2400 carries 512 MB. RADEON E2400 gives you 300% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the Quadro FX 550 and 64-bit on the RADEON E2400. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Quadro FX 550) vs 512 KB (RADEON E2400) — the RADEON E2400 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro FX 550	RADEON E2400
VRAM Capacity	0.125 GB	0.5 GB+300%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	256 KB	512 KB+100%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro FX 550 draws 189W versus the RADEON E2400's 50W — a 116.3% difference. The RADEON E2400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 550) vs 350W (RADEON E2400). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.

Feature	Quadro FX 550	RADEON E2400
TDP	189W	50W-74%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Legacy
Perf/Watt	0.3	1.0+233%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Quadro FX 550 came in at $150, while the RADEON E2400 launched at $100. On MSRP, RADEON E2400 was 33.3% cheaper ($50 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 0.4 (Quadro FX 550) vs 0.5 (RADEON E2400) — the RADEON E2400 offers 25% better value. The newer card here is RADEON E2400 (2017 vs 2008).

Feature	Quadro FX 550	RADEON E2400
MSRP	$150	$100-33%
Performance per Dollar	0.4	0.5+25%
Codename	GT200B	Lexa
Release	November 11 2008	April 20 2017
Ranking	#815	#773

Search Quadro FX 550 on Amazon

Search RADEON E2400 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.