Quadro FX 330 vs Radeon RX Vega 11

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking601not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.87no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameRavenNV37
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date10 May 2018 (6 years ago)28 June 2004 (20 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 cores704no data
Core clock speed300 MHz250 MHz
Boost clock speed1251 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,940 million45 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt21 Watt
Texture fill rate55.041.000
Floating-point processing power1.761 TFLOPSno data
ROPs82
TMUs444

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 1.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
WidthIGP1-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 typeSystem SharedDDR2
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared64 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared200 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data3.2 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 ConnectorsMotherboard Dependent1x DVI

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)9.0a
Shader Model6.7 (6.4)no data
OpenGL4.61.5 (2.1)
OpenCL2.1N/A
Vulkan1.3N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 10 May 2018 28 June 2004
Chip lithography 14 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 21 Watt

RX Vega 11 has an age advantage of 13 years, and a 971.4% more advanced lithography process.

FX 330, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 11 and Quadro FX 330. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 11 is a desktop card while Quadro FX 330 is a 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.


AMD Radeon RX Vega 11
Radeon RX Vega 11
NVIDIA Quadro FX 330
Quadro FX 330

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.


3.9 1754 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 11 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Quadro FX 330 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.