Quadro T1000 Max-Q vs FirePro S9050
Quadro T1000 Max-Q
Popular choices:
FirePro S9050
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 T1000 Max-Q is positioned at rank 17 and the FirePro S9050 is on rank 271, so the Quadro T1000 Max-Q offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro T1000 Max-Q
Performance Per Dollar FirePro S9050
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Quadro T1000 Max-Q uses modern memory architecture. The Quadro T1000 Max-Q likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The FirePro S9050 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro T1000 Max-Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FirePro S9050.
| Insight | Quadro T1000 Max-Q | FirePro S9050 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | Standard Size (254mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro T1000 Max-Q 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 T1000 Max-Q and FirePro S9050
Quadro T1000 Max-Q
The Quadro T1000 Max-Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 765 MHz to 1350 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,000 points.
FirePro S9050
The FirePro S9050 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 7 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 900 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,901 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro T1000 Max-Q scores 5,000 and the FirePro S9050 reaches 4,901 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro T1000 Max-Q is built on Turing while the FirePro S9050 uses GCN 1.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (Quadro T1000 Max-Q) vs 1,792 (FirePro S9050). Raw compute: 2.419 TFLOPS (Quadro T1000 Max-Q) vs 3.226 TFLOPS (FirePro S9050).
| Feature | Quadro T1000 Max-Q | FirePro S9050 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,000+2% | 4,901 |
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 1792+100% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.419 TFLOPS | 3.226 TFLOPS+33% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 56 | 112+100% |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+100% | 448 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+33% | 0.75 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro T1000 Max-Q | FirePro S9050 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Quadro T1000 Max-Q) vs 0.75 MB (FirePro S9050) — the Quadro T1000 Max-Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro T1000 Max-Q | FirePro S9050 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+33% | 0.75 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro T1000 Max-Q draws 50W versus the FirePro S9050's 225W — a 127.3% difference. The Quadro T1000 Max-Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro T1000 Max-Q) vs 350W (FirePro S9050). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro T1000 Max-Q | FirePro S9050 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-78% | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 254mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | — | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 90°C |
| Perf/Watt | 100.0+359% | 21.8 |
Value Analysis
The Quadro T1000 Max-Q is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2014).
| Feature | Quadro T1000 Max-Q | FirePro S9050 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $1999 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $1825 |
| Codename | TU117 | Tahiti |
| Release | May 27 2019 | August 7 2014 |
| Ranking | #364 | #446 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro T1000 Max-Q and FirePro S9050
