Arc A380 vs Quadro FX 350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated331
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data43.73
Power efficiencyno data14.97
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameG72DG2-128
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date20 April 2006 (18 years ago)14 June 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 coresno data1024
Core clock speed550 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2050 MHz
Number of transistors112 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)21 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate2.200131.2
Floating-point processing powerno data4.198 TFLOPS
ROPs232
TMUs464
Tensor Coresno data128
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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 1.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length168 mm222 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 8-pin

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 typeDDR2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount128 MB6 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed405 MHz1937 MHz
Memory bandwidth6.48 GB/s186.0 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 VGA1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model3.06.6
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3

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.

FX 350 85
Arc A380 6215
+7212%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 20 April 2006 14 June 2022
Maximum RAM amount 128 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 21 Watt 75 Watt

FX 350 has 257.1% lower power consumption.

Arc A380, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 16 years, a 4700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1400% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Quadro FX 350 and Arc A380. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro FX 350 is a workstation graphics card while Arc A380 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 FX 350
Quadro FX 350
Intel Arc A380
Arc A380

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.


5 1 vote

Rate Quadro FX 350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 811 votes

Rate Arc A380 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.