Quadro FX 3500 vs Radeon RX 550 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 550 Mobile with Quadro FX 3500, including specs and performance data.
RX 550 Mobile outperforms FX 3500 by a whopping 943% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 557 | 1185 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 4.47 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 9.62 | 0.58 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | Lexa | G71 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 2 July 2017 (7 years ago) | 22 May 2006 (18 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $79.99 | $1,599 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
RX 550 Mobile and FX 3500 have a nearly equal value for money.
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 | 640 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 1100 MHz | 450 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1287 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,200 million | 278 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 80 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 51.48 | 9.000 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.647 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 40 | 20 |
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 | large | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 173 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 | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz | 660 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | 42.24 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 Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | + | - |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | N/A |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 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:
| Full HD | 15
+1400%
| 1−2
−1400%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 5.33
+29885%
| 1599.00
−29885%
|
- RX 550 Mobile has 29885% lower cost per frame in 1080p
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12
+1100%
|
1−2
−1100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10 | 0−1 |
| Elden Ring | 14
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 28
+1300%
|
2−3
−1300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
| Dota 2 | 27
+1250%
|
2−3
−1250%
|
| Elden Ring | 18−20
+1800%
|
1−2
−1800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 29
+1350%
|
2−3
−1350%
|
| Fortnite | 40−45
+1267%
|
3−4
−1267%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24
+1100%
|
2−3
−1100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 18
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
+1040%
|
5−6
−1040%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
| World of Tanks | 100−110
+980%
|
10−11
−980%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
| Dota 2 | 43
+975%
|
4−5
−975%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+1450%
|
2−3
−1450%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
+1040%
|
5−6
−1040%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Elden Ring | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+1200%
|
3−4
−1200%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| World of Tanks | 50−55
+1175%
|
4−5
−1175%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+1100%
|
1−2
−1100%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+1200%
|
1−2
−1200%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
| Elden Ring | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+1600%
|
1−2
−1600%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 7−8 | 0−1 |
This is how RX 550 Mobile and FX 3500 compete in popular games:
- RX 550 Mobile is 1400% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 6.99 | 0.67 |
| Recency | 2 July 2017 | 22 May 2006 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 256 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 80 Watt |
RX 550 Mobile has a 943.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 542.9% more advanced lithography process, and 60% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX 550 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3500 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon RX 550 Mobile is a notebook card while Quadro FX 3500 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
