CPU
GPU
Radeon X1650 Pro
Popular choices:
Quadro FX 350
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 X1650 Pro is positioned at rank 334 and the Quadro FX 350 is on rank 385, so the Radeon X1650 Pro offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon X1650 Pro
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 350
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon X1650 Pro is significantly newer (2023 vs 2008). The Radeon X1650 Pro likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 350 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro FX 350 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Radeon X1650 Pro offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Radeon X1650 Pro | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (7nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro FX 350 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $15 (vs $15), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 1.2% better value per dollar than the Radeon X1650 Pro.
| Insight | Radeon X1650 Pro | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1.2%) |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 X1650 Pro and Quadro FX 350
Radeon X1650 Pro
The Radeon X1650 Pro is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 17 2023. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 2581 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 85 points. Launch price was $549.
Quadro FX 350
The Quadro FX 350 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: 86 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon X1650 Pro scores 85 and the Quadro FX 350 reaches 86 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon X1650 Pro is built on RDNA 2.0 while the Quadro FX 350 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 7 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (Radeon X1650 Pro) vs 240 (Quadro FX 350).
| Feature | Radeon X1650 Pro | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 85 | 86+1% |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 7 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 2560+967% | 240 |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 160+100% | 80 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon X1650 Pro | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 X1650 Pro comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 350 has 128 MB. The Radeon X1650 Pro offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon X1650 Pro | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB+300% | 0.125 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon X1650 Pro draws 250W versus the Quadro FX 350's 189W — a 27.8% difference. The Quadro FX 350 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon X1650 Pro) vs 350W (Quadro FX 350). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon X1650 Pro | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 189W-24% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Perf/Watt | 0.3 | 0.5+67% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon X1650 Pro launched at $100 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the Quadro FX 350 launched at $199 and now averages $15. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 5.7 (Radeon X1650 Pro) vs 5.7 (Quadro FX 350) — the Quadro FX 350 offers 0% better value. The Radeon X1650 Pro is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2008).
| Feature | Radeon X1650 Pro | Quadro FX 350 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-50% | $199 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | $15 |
| Performance per Dollar | 5.7 | 5.7 |
| Codename | Navi 22 | GT200B |
| Release | October 17 2023 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #92 | #815 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon X1650 Pro and Quadro FX 350
