Quadro FX 350 vs Radeon HD 8650G + HD 8670M Dual Graphics

Place in the ranking	813	1372
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	no data	0.72
Architecture	no data	Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code name	no data	G72
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	1 August 2013 (11 years ago)	20 April 2006 (18 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 cores	768	no data
Core clock speed	720 / 775 MHz	550 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	112 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	21 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	2.200
ROPs	no data	2
TMUs	no data	4

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	medium sized	no data
Interface	no data	PCIe 1.0 x16
Length	no data	168 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	DDR3	DDR2
Maximum RAM amount	no data	128 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1800 - 2000 MHz	405 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	6.48 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 Connectors

no data

1x DVI, 1x VGA

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11	9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model	no data	3.0
OpenGL	no data	2.1
OpenCL	no data	N/A
Vulkan	-	N/A

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:

900p

29
+1350%

2−3

−1350%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6

0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Hitman 3	7−8	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +2000%	1−2 −2000%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +1167%	3−4 −1167%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Hitman 3	7−8	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +2000%	1−2 −2000%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +1167%	3−4 −1167%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Hitman 3	7−8	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +2000%	1−2 −2000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +1167%	3−4 −1167%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Hitman 3	8−9	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	16−18 +1500%	1−2 −1500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

0−1

This is how HD 8650G + HD 8670M Dual Graphics and FX 350 compete in popular games:

HD 8650G + HD 8670M Dual Graphics is 1350% faster in 900p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.66	0.22
Recency	1 August 2013	20 April 2006
Chip lithography	28 nm	90 nm

HD 8650G + HD 8670M Dual Graphics has a 1109.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 8650G + HD 8670M Dual Graphics is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 350 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8650G + HD 8670M Dual Graphics is a notebook card while Quadro FX 350 is a workstation one.

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