Quadro FX 560
VS
GeForce 405

Quadro FX 560 vs GeForce 405

NVIDIA

Quadro FX 560

2008Core: 610 MHz
VS
NVIDIA

GeForce 405

2015Core: 928 MHzBoost: 1020 MHz

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 560 is positioned at rank 390 and the GeForce 405 is on rank 589, so the Quadro FX 560 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 560

#374
Tesla K20m
MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55
38876%
#389
GRID V100-2Q
MSRP: $10000|Avg: $2000
100%
#390
Quadro FX 560
MSRP: $299|Avg: $15
100%
#391
Quadro FX 5800
MSRP: $3499|Avg: $40
92%
#392
FireStream 9170
MSRP: $1999|Avg: $20
84%
#393
RTX Pro 6000 Blackwell DC-12Q
MSRP: $8565|Avg: $8565
84%
#394
Quadro FX 1700
MSRP: $699|Avg: $500
82%
#395
GRID P40-6Q
MSRP: $3000|Avg: $150
79%
#396
Quadro FX 540
MSRP: $299|Avg: $15
71%
#397
Tesla M2070-Q
MSRP: $5489|Avg: $50
63%
#398
Quadro FX 1500
MSRP: $699|Avg: $30
63%
#399
Quadro 7000
MSRP: $14499|Avg: $300
63%
#400
Quadro FX 3700
MSRP: $1599|Avg: $500
61%
#401
Quadro FX 4700 X2
MSRP: $2999|Avg: $15
61%
#402
GRID M10-0B
MSRP: $4000|Avg: $1000
58%
#404
GRID K340
MSRP: $3299|Avg: $57
53%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce 405

#579
Radeon RX 550X (móvel)
MSRP: $35|Avg: $35
3680%
#581
3336%
#582
3327%
#586
GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50
3026%
#587
Radeon RX 6300
MSRP: $60|Avg: $40
3005%
#589
GeForce 405
MSRP: $40|Avg: $5
100%
#590
Mobility Radeon HD 5650
MSRP: $150|Avg: $30
100%
#591
Mobility Radeon HD 3670
MSRP: $79|Avg: $15
100%
#592
GeForce 510
MSRP: $99|Avg: $15
99%
#593
Mobility Radeon HD 3650
MSRP: $49|Avg: $15
97%
#594
GeForce 9300M G
MSRP: $30|Avg: $30
96%
#596
GeForce 9800 GT
MSRP: $160|Avg: $20
95%
#598
GeForce 9100M G
MSRP: $30|Avg: $10
94%
#599
Mobility Radeon X1900
MSRP: $49|Avg: $15
94%
#600
Mobility Radeon HD 4330
MSRP: $49|Avg: $49
94%
#601
GeForce 210
MSRP: $50|Avg: $5
94%
#602
Radeon R7 M365X
MSRP: $300|Avg: $300
93%
#603
Mobility Radeon HD 5870
MSRP: $399|Avg: $50
93%
#604
Radeon R7 M260DX
MSRP: $300|Avg: $300
92%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce 405 is significantly newer (2015 vs 2008). The GeForce 405 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 560 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce 405 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.5% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (512 MB vs 128 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 560.

InsightQuadro FX 560GeForce 405
Performance
Lower raw frame rates (-3.5%)
Leading raw performance (+3.5%)
Longevity
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013))
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))
Ecosystem
Supports FSR Upscaling
Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM
❌ Less VRAM capacity
✅ More VRAM (+300%)
Efficiency
⚡ Higher Power Consumption
💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit
📏 Compact / SFF Friendly
📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce 405 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce 405 holds the technical lead. Priced at $5 (vs $15), it costs 67% less, resulting in a 210.5% higher cost efficiency score.

InsightQuadro FX 560GeForce 405
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Better overall value (+210.5%)
Upfront Cost
⚠️Higher upfront cost ($15)
More affordable ($5)

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 560 and GeForce 405

NVIDIA

Quadro FX 560

The Quadro FX 560 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: 114 points. Launch price was $3,499.

NVIDIA

GeForce 405

The GeForce 405 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 27 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 928 MHz to 1020 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 118 points.

Graphics Performance

The Quadro FX 560 scores 114 and the GeForce 405 reaches 118 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 560 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the GeForce 405 uses Maxwell, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 560) vs 640 (GeForce 405). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 560) vs 1.306 TFLOPS (GeForce 405).

FeatureQuadro FX 560GeForce 405
G3D Mark Score
114
118+4%
Architecture
Tesla 2.0
Maxwell
Process Node
55 nm
28 nm
Shading Units
240
640+167%
Compute (TFLOPS)
0.6221 TFLOPS
1.306 TFLOPS+110%
ROPs
32+100%
16
TMUs
80+100%
40
L2 Cache
0.25 MB
2 MB+700%

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureQuadro FX 560GeForce 405
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 560 comes with 128 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce 405 has 512 MB. The GeForce 405 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Quadro FX 560) vs 2 MB (GeForce 405) — the GeForce 405 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureQuadro FX 560GeForce 405
VRAM Capacity
0.125 GB
0.5 GB+300%
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Bus Width
64-bit
128-bit+100%
L2 Cache
0.25 MB
2 MB+700%
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 9_0c (Quadro FX 560) vs 10.1 (GeForce 405). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

FeatureQuadro FX 560GeForce 405
DirectX
9_0c
10.1+12%
Max Displays
2
2
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro FX 560 draws 189W versus the GeForce 405's 75W — a 86.4% difference. The GeForce 405 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 560) vs 350W (GeForce 405). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Card length: 1mm vs 168mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots.

FeatureQuadro FX 560GeForce 405
TDP
189W
75W-60%
Recommended PSU
350W
350W
Power Connector
PCIe-powered
Legacy
Length
1mm
168mm
Height
64mm
Slots
1
1
Temp (Load)
75°C
Perf/Watt
0.6
1.6+167%
💰

Value Analysis

The Quadro FX 560 launched at $299 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the GeForce 405 launched at $40 and now averages $5. The GeForce 405 costs 66.7% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 7.6 (Quadro FX 560) vs 23.6 (GeForce 405) — the GeForce 405 offers 210.5% better value. The GeForce 405 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2008).

FeatureQuadro FX 560GeForce 405
MSRP
$299
$40-87%
Avg Price (30d)
$15
$5-67%
Performance per Dollar
7.6
23.6+211%
Codename
GT200B
GM107
Release
November 11 2008
October 27 2015
Ranking
#815
#671