Quadro vs Radeon R9 M395X
Quadro
Popular choices:
Radeon R9 M395X
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 is positioned at rank 215 and the Radeon R9 M395X is on rank 391, so the Quadro offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R9 M395X
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon R9 M395X is significantly newer (2015 vs 1999). The Radeon R9 M395X likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R9 M395X is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.4% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro.
| Insight | Quadro | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (1999 / Celsius (1999−2005)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro holds the technical lead. Priced at $50 (vs $150), it costs 67% less, resulting in a 193% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+193%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($50) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) |
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 and Radeon R9 M395X
Quadro
The Quadro is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in 1999. It features the Celsius architecture. The core clock speed is 135 MHz. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 220 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,000 points.
Radeon R9 M395X
The Radeon R9 M395X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 5 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 723 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,120 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro scores 5,000 and the Radeon R9 M395X reaches 5,120 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro is built on Celsius while the Radeon R9 M395X uses GCN 3.0, both on 220 nm vs 28 nm.
| Feature | Quadro | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,000 | 5,120+2% |
| Architecture | Celsius | GCN 3.0 |
| Process Node | 220 nm | 28 nm |
| ROPs | 4 | 32+700% |
| TMUs | 4 | 128+3100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| 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 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 M395X has 4 GB. The Radeon R9 M395X offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 256-bit.
| Feature | Quadro | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 256-bit+300% |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro draws 75W versus the Radeon R9 M395X's 75W — a 0% difference. The Radeon R9 M395X is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro) vs 350W (Radeon R9 M395X). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Mobile.
| Feature | Quadro | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Mobile |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 66.7 | 68.3+2% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro launched at $1000 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the Radeon R9 M395X launched at $600 and now averages $150. The Quadro costs 66.7% less ($100 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 100.0 (Quadro) vs 34.1 (Radeon R9 M395X) — the Quadro offers 193.3% better value. The Radeon R9 M395X is the newer GPU (2015 vs 1999).
| Feature | Quadro | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1000 | $600-40% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50-67% | $150 |
| Performance per Dollar | 100.0+193% | 34.1 |
| Codename | NV10 | Amethyst |
| Release | 1999 | May 5 2015 |
| Ranking | #900 | #438 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro and Radeon R9 M395X
