Radeon X1600 vs Quadro NVS 110M
Radeon X1600
Popular choices:
Quadro NVS 110M
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 X1600 is positioned at rank 364 and the Quadro NVS 110M is on rank 221, so the Quadro NVS 110M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon X1600
Performance Per Dollar Quadro NVS 110M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon X1600 is significantly newer (2020 vs 2013). The Radeon X1600 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro NVS 110M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon X1600 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro NVS 110M.
| Insight | Radeon X1600 | Quadro NVS 110M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.1%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (7nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon X1600 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 X1600 and Quadro NVS 110M
Radeon X1600
The Radeon X1600 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 28 2020. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 2105 MHz. It has 4608 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 255W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 49 points.
Quadro NVS 110M
The Quadro NVS 110M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 706 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 45W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 48 points. Launch price was $109.94.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon X1600 scores 49 and the Quadro NVS 110M reaches 48 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon X1600 is built on RDNA 2.0 while the Quadro NVS 110M uses Kepler, both on 7 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 4,608 (Radeon X1600) vs 384 (Quadro NVS 110M). Raw compute: 19.4 TFLOPS (Radeon X1600) vs 0.5422 TFLOPS (Quadro NVS 110M).
| Feature | Radeon X1600 | Quadro NVS 110M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 49+2% | 48 |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 7 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 4608+1100% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 19.4 TFLOPS+3478% | 0.5422 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64+300% | 16 |
| TMUs | 288+800% | 32 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon X1600 | Quadro NVS 110M |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 | Quadro NVS 110M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon X1600 draws 255W versus the Quadro NVS 110M's 45W — a 140% difference. The Quadro NVS 110M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon X1600) vs 350W (Quadro NVS 110M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 | Quadro NVS 110M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 255W | 45W-82% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 168mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.2 | 1.1+450% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon X1600 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2013).
| Feature | Radeon X1600 | Quadro NVS 110M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $199 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49 | — |
| Codename | Navi 21 | GK107 |
| Release | October 28 2020 | July 23 2013 |
| Ranking | #34 | #856 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon X1600 and Quadro NVS 110M
