Quadro FX 560 vs Radeon HD 2400 XT

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 560 vs Radeon HD 2400 XT 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 560 vs Radeon HD 2400 XT: 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 560

2008

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 128 MB vs 256 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.
❌
278.5% HIGHER MSRP
$299 MSRPvs$79 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.4 vs 1.5 G3D/$ ($299 MSRP vs $79 MSRP).

Radeon HD 2400 XT

2012

Why buy it

✅Costs $220 less on MSRP ($79 MSRP vs $299 MSRP).
✅Delivers 295.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 1.5 vs 0.4 G3D/$ ($79 MSRP vs $299 MSRP).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (256 MB vs 128 MB).

Trade-offs

❌2012 hardware with 256 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?

Radeon HD 2400 XT is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 4.4% in PassMark G3D (119 vs 114), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

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

Quadro FX 560 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 HD 2400 XT makes the most sense to buy today. It is $220 cheaper on MSRP at $79 vs $299, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 295.1% (1.5 vs 0.4), so the value case lines up with the gaming result. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, Radeon HD 2400 XT is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, Quadro FX 560 has the stronger long-term case.

Quadro FX 560 vs Radeon HD 2400 XT Technical Specifications

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

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.

Radeon HD 2400 XT

The Radeon HD 2400 XT is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 19 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 925 MHz to 975 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 185W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 119 points. Launch price was $270.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro FX 560 scores 114 and the Radeon HD 2400 XT reaches 119 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 560 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Radeon HD 2400 XT uses GCN 1.0, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 560) vs 1,536 (Radeon HD 2400 XT). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 560) vs 2.995 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 2400 XT).

Feature	Quadro FX 560	Radeon HD 2400 XT
G3D Mark Score	114	119+4%
Architecture	Tesla 2.0	GCN 1.0
Process Node	55 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	240	1536+540%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.6221 TFLOPS	2.995 TFLOPS+381%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	80	96+20%
L2 Cache	256 KB	512 KB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro FX 560	Radeon HD 2400 XT
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 560 has 128 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon HD 2400 XT carries 256 MB. Radeon HD 2400 XT gives you 100% 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 560 and 128-bit on the Radeon HD 2400 XT. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Quadro FX 560) vs 512 KB (Radeon HD 2400 XT) — the Radeon HD 2400 XT has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro FX 560	Radeon HD 2400 XT
VRAM Capacity	0.125 GB	0.25 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 560 draws 189W versus the Radeon HD 2400 XT's 185W — a 2.1% difference. The Radeon HD 2400 XT is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 560) vs 350W (Radeon HD 2400 XT). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin.

Feature	Quadro FX 560	Radeon HD 2400 XT
TDP	189W	185W-2%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	1x 6-pin
Length	1mm	—
Slots	1	—
Perf/Watt	0.6	0.6

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Quadro FX 560 came in at $299, while the Radeon HD 2400 XT launched at $79. On MSRP, Radeon HD 2400 XT was 73.6% cheaper ($220 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 0.4 (Quadro FX 560) vs 1.5 (Radeon HD 2400 XT) — the Radeon HD 2400 XT offers 275% better value. The newer card here is Radeon HD 2400 XT (2012 vs 2008).

Feature	Quadro FX 560	Radeon HD 2400 XT
MSRP	$299	$79-74%
Performance per Dollar	0.4	1.5+275%
Codename	GT200B	Tahiti
Release	November 11 2008	November 19 2012
Ranking	#815	#469

Search Quadro FX 560 on Amazon

Search Radeon HD 2400 XT 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.