ATI Radeon X1650 vs Quadro M2000M

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking480not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency11.28no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)R500 (2005−2007)
GPU code nameGM107RV516
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date3 December 2015 (8 years ago)20 November 2007 (16 years ago)

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 cores640no data
Core clock speed1029 MHz635 MHz
Boost clock speed1098 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million107 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Wattno data
Texture fill rate43.922.540
Floating-point processing power1.405 TFLOPSno data
ROPs164
TMUs404

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno data1-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 typeGDDR5DDR2
Maximum RAM amount4 GB256 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz392 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s6.272 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX129.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.52.0
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA5.0-

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.

M2000M 3459
+4772%
ATI X1650 71

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 December 2015 20 November 2007
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 80 nm

M2000M has an age advantage of 8 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Quadro M2000M and Radeon X1650. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro M2000M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon X1650 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 M2000M
Quadro M2000M
ATI Radeon X1650
Radeon X1650

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.


3.6 493 votes

Rate Quadro M2000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 65 votes

Rate Radeon X1650 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.