RADEON 9800 SE vs Quadro FX 2000

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.

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

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 2000

#411

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

1477300%

#426

Quadro FX 2000

MSRP: $3000|Avg: $40

100%

#427

GRID V100-8Q

MSRP: $10000|Avg: $10000

0%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The RADEON 9800 SE is significantly newer (2025 vs 2010). The RADEON 9800 SE likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 2000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The RADEON 9800 SE is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 33.3% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (256 MB vs 128 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 2000.

Insight	RADEON 9800 SE	Quadro FX 2000
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+33.3%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-33.3%)
Longevity	RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) (4nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+100%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

The RADEON 9800 SE offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $30 versus $40 for the Quadro FX 2000, it costs 25% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 77.8% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	RADEON 9800 SE	Quadro FX 2000
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+77.8%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($30)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($40)

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.

RADEON 9800 SE Benchmark Check

Quadro FX 2000 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of RADEON 9800 SE and Quadro FX 2000

RADEON 9800 SE

The RADEON 9800 SE is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 6 2025. It features the RDNA 3.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1295 MHz to 2900 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 40 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 24 points.

Quadro FX 2000

The Quadro FX 2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 24 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 62W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 18 points. Launch price was $599.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the RADEON 9800 SE scores 24 versus the Quadro FX 2000's 18 — the RADEON 9800 SE leads by 33.3%. The RADEON 9800 SE is built on RDNA 3.5 while the Quadro FX 2000 uses Fermi, both on 4 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (RADEON 9800 SE) vs 192 (Quadro FX 2000). Raw compute: 14.85 TFLOPS (RADEON 9800 SE) vs 0.48 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 2000).

Feature	RADEON 9800 SE	Quadro FX 2000
G3D Mark Score	24+33%	18
Architecture	RDNA 3.5	Fermi
Process Node	4 nm	40 nm
Shading Units	2560+1233%	192
Compute (TFLOPS)	14.85 TFLOPS+2994%	0.48 TFLOPS
ROPs	64+300%	16
TMUs	160+400%	32
L2 Cache	8 MB+3100%	0.25 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	RADEON 9800 SE	Quadro FX 2000
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	AMD Anti-Lag	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The RADEON 9800 SE comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 2000 has 128 MB. The RADEON 9800 SE offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 8 MB (RADEON 9800 SE) vs 0.25 MB (Quadro FX 2000) — the RADEON 9800 SE has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	RADEON 9800 SE	Quadro FX 2000
VRAM Capacity	0.25 GB+100%	0.125 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	8 MB+3100%	0.25 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The RADEON 9800 SE draws 55W versus the Quadro FX 2000's 62W — a 12% difference. The RADEON 9800 SE is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (RADEON 9800 SE) vs 350W (Quadro FX 2000). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	RADEON 9800 SE	Quadro FX 2000
TDP	55W-11%	62W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	Legacy	PCIe-powered
Perf/Watt	0.4+33%	0.3

💰

Value Analysis

The RADEON 9800 SE launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the Quadro FX 2000 launched at $3000 and now averages $40. The RADEON 9800 SE costs 25% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.8 (RADEON 9800 SE) vs 0.5 (Quadro FX 2000) — the RADEON 9800 SE offers 60% better value. The RADEON 9800 SE is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2010).