Quadro FX 3500M vs Quadro 2000

Place in the ranking	840	1150
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.15	0.11
Power efficiency	2.73	1.22
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code name	GF106	G71
Market segment	Workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	24 December 2010 (14 years ago)	1 March 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$599	$99.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro 2000 has 36% better value for money than FX 3500M.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	192	32
Core clock speed	625 MHz	575 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	575 MHz
Number of transistors	1,170 million	278 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	62 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	20.00	13.80
Floating-point processing power	0.48 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	32	24

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop size	no data	large
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	MXM-III
Length	178 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	650 MHz	600 MHz
Memory bandwidth	41.6 GB/s	38.4 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort

No outputs

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (11_0)	9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model	5.1	3.0
OpenGL	4.6	2.1
OpenCL	1.1	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	2.1	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Quadro 2000 2.46
+208%

FX 3500M 0.80

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Quadro 2000 946
+209%

FX 3500M 306

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Elden Ring	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Elden Ring	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Fortnite	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
World of Tanks	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
World of Tanks	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Valorant	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Valorant	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 37 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.46	0.80
Recency	24 December 2010	1 March 2007
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	40 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	62 Watt	45 Watt

Quadro 2000 has a 207.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 125% more advanced lithography process.

FX 3500M, on the other hand, has 37.8% lower power consumption.

The Quadro 2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3500M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 2000 is a workstation card while Quadro FX 3500M is a mobile workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.