Radeon HD 3000 vs Quadro FX 370M
Radeon HD 3000
Popular choices:
Quadro FX 370M
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 HD 3000 is positioned at rank 316 and the Quadro FX 370M is on rank 354, so the Radeon HD 3000 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 3000
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 370M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon HD 3000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.2% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (512 MB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 370M.
| Insight | Radeon HD 3000 | Quadro FX 370M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon HD 3000 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 Radeon HD 3000 and Quadro FX 370M
Radeon HD 3000
The Radeon HD 3000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 1 2011. It features the TeraScale 3 architecture. The core clock speed is 750 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 186W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 96 points. Launch price was $180.
Quadro FX 370M
The Quadro FX 370M 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: 93 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon HD 3000 scores 96 and the Quadro FX 370M reaches 93 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 3000 is built on TeraScale 3 while the Quadro FX 370M uses Tesla 2.0, both on 40 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 1,280 (Radeon HD 3000) vs 240 (Quadro FX 370M). Raw compute: 1.92 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 3000) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 370M).
| Feature | Radeon HD 3000 | Quadro FX 370M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 96+3% | 93 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 3 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 1280+433% | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.92 TFLOPS+209% | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 80 |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon HD 3000 | Quadro FX 370M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 HD 3000 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 370M has 256 MB. The Radeon HD 3000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (Radeon HD 3000) vs 256 KB (Quadro FX 370M) — the Radeon HD 3000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon HD 3000 | Quadro FX 370M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB+100% | 0.25 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 3000 draws 186W versus the Quadro FX 370M's 189W — a 1.6% difference. The Radeon HD 3000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon HD 3000) vs 350W (Quadro FX 370M). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon HD 3000 | Quadro FX 370M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 186W-2% | 189W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 1mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.5 | 0.5 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon HD 3000 is the newer GPU (2011 vs 2008).
| Feature | Radeon HD 3000 | Quadro FX 370M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $50 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10 | — |
| Codename | Cayman | GT200B |
| Release | December 1 2011 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #598 | #815 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon HD 3000 and Quadro FX 370M
