Radeon HD 6490M vs Quadro FX 880M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 880M with Radeon HD 6490M, including specs and performance data.

FX 880M
2010
1 GB GDDR3, 35 Watt
0.58

HD 6490M outperforms FX 880M by an impressive 69% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12061110
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiency1.16no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGT216Seymour
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date7 January 2010 (14 years ago)4 January 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,193.03

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 cores48160
Core clock speed550 MHz800 MHz
Number of transistors486 million370 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Wattno data
Texture fill rate8.8006.400
Floating-point processing power0.1162 TFLOPS0.256 TFLOPS
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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16

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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed790 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.28 GB/s25.6 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model4.15.0
OpenGL3.34.4
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.2-

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.

FX 880M 0.58
HD 6490M 0.98
+69%

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 880M 223
HD 6490M 377
+69.1%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

FX 880M 2639
+5.1%
HD 6490M 2511

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD19
+5.6%
18
−5.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data66.28

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−6.7%
30−35
+6.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−6.7%
30−35
+6.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−6.7%
30−35
+6.7%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 1−2
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

This is how FX 880M and HD 6490M compete in popular games:

  • FX 880M is 6% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD 6490M is 300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD 6490M is ahead in 20 tests (48%)
  • there's a draw in 22 tests (52%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.58 0.98
Recency 7 January 2010 4 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 512 MB

FX 880M has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

HD 6490M, on the other hand, has a 69% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 11 months.

The Radeon HD 6490M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 880M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 880M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon HD 6490M 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.

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 880M
Quadro FX 880M
AMD Radeon HD 6490M
Radeon HD 6490M

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.


3.2 41 vote

Rate Quadro FX 880M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 36 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6490M 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.