CPU
GPU
RADEON E4690
Popular choices:
Quadro FX 4600
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 RADEON E4690 is positioned at rank 713 and the Quadro FX 4600 is on rank 404, so the Quadro FX 4600 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar RADEON E4690
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 4600
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The RADEON E4690 is significantly newer (2015 vs 2008). The RADEON E4690 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 4600 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The RADEON E4690 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.5% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro FX 4600 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | RADEON E4690 | Quadro FX 4600 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.5%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+50%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro FX 4600 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro FX 4600 holds the technical lead. Priced at $50 (vs $558), it costs 91% less, resulting in a 1010.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | RADEON E4690 | Quadro FX 4600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1010.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($558) | ✅More affordable ($50) |
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 RADEON E4690 and Quadro FX 4600
RADEON E4690
The RADEON E4690 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in September 29 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 735 MHz to 1000 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 95W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 405 points.
Quadro FX 4600
The Quadro FX 4600 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 403 points. Launch price was $1,799.
Graphics Performance
The RADEON E4690 scores 405 and the Quadro FX 4600 reaches 403 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The RADEON E4690 is built on GCN 3.0 while the Quadro FX 4600 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (RADEON E4690) vs 192 (Quadro FX 4600). Raw compute: 4.096 TFLOPS (RADEON E4690) vs 0.4623 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 4600).
| Feature | RADEON E4690 | Quadro FX 4600 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 405 | 403 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+967% | 192 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.096 TFLOPS+786% | 0.4623 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+33% | 24 |
| TMUs | 128+100% | 64 |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+167% | 192 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | RADEON E4690 | Quadro FX 4600 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 E4690 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 4600 has 768 MB. The Quadro FX 4600 offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (RADEON E4690) vs 192 KB (Quadro FX 4600) — the RADEON E4690 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | RADEON E4690 | Quadro FX 4600 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.75 GB+50% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+167% | 192 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The RADEON E4690 draws 95W versus the Quadro FX 4600's 150W — a 44.9% difference. The RADEON E4690 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (RADEON E4690) vs 350W (Quadro FX 4600). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | RADEON E4690 | Quadro FX 4600 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 95W-37% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | PCIe-powered |
| Perf/Watt | 4.3+59% | 2.7 |
Value Analysis
The RADEON E4690 launched at $558 MSRP and currently averages $558, while the Quadro FX 4600 launched at $1999 and now averages $50. The Quadro FX 4600 costs 91% less ($508 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.7 (RADEON E4690) vs 8.1 (Quadro FX 4600) — the Quadro FX 4600 offers 1057.1% better value. The RADEON E4690 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2008).
| Feature | RADEON E4690 | Quadro FX 4600 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $558-72% | $1999 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $558 | $50-91% |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.7 | 8.1+1057% |
| Codename | Amethyst | GT200B |
| Release | September 29 2015 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #420 | #884 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on RADEON E4690 and Quadro FX 4600
