ATI Radeon 8500 vs Quadro 400

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameGT216R200
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date5 April 2011 (13 years ago)14 August 2001 (23 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$169 no data

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 cores48no data
Core clock speed450 MHz275 MHz
Number of transistors486 million60 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)32 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate7.2002.200
Floating-point processing power0.108 TFLOPSno data
ROPs84
TMUs168

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16AGP 4x
Length163 mmno data
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDR3DDR
Maximum RAM amount512 MB64 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed770 MHz275 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.32 GB/s8.8 GB/s

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)8.1
Shader Model4.1no data
OpenGL3.31.4
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.2-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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



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 400 148
+2367%
ATI 8500 6

Pros & cons summary


Recency 5 April 2011 14 August 2001
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 64 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 32 Watt 23 Watt

Quadro 400 has an age advantage of 9 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 275% more advanced lithography process.

ATI 8500, on the other hand, has 39.1% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro 400 and Radeon 8500. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro 400 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon 8500 is a desktop one.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Quadro 400
Quadro 400
ATI Radeon 8500
Radeon 8500

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.8 13 votes

Rate Quadro 400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 94 votes

Rate Radeon 8500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.