AMD Radeon E9550 MXM vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 3500M
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon E9550 MXM and NVIDIA Quadro FX 3500M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon E9550 MXM
- Videocard is newer: launch date 9 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- Around 95% higher core clock speed: 1120 MHz vs 575 MHz
- 2.2x more boost clock speed: 1266 MHz vs 575 MHz
- 13.2x more texture fill rate: 182.3 GTexel / s vs 13.8 GTexel / s
- 96x more pipelines: 2304 vs 24
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 90 nm
- 16x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 512 MB
- 4.2x more memory clock speed: 5000 MHz vs 1200 MHz
Launch date | 27 September 2016 vs 1 March 2007 |
Core clock speed | 1120 MHz vs 575 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1266 MHz vs 575 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 182.3 GTexel / s vs 13.8 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 2304 vs 24 |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 90 nm |
Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 512 MB |
Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz vs 1200 MHz |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 3500M
- 2.1x lower typical power consumption: 45 Watt vs 95 Watt
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt vs 95 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon E9550 MXM
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 3500M
Name | AMD Radeon E9550 MXM | NVIDIA Quadro FX 3500M |
---|---|---|
Geekbench - OpenCL | 36624 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 112.64 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1474.586 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 9.473 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 96.618 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 507.291 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6622 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3597 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3208 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6622 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3597 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3208 | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 306 | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 309 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon E9550 MXM | NVIDIA Quadro FX 3500M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Curie |
Code name | Ellesmere | G71 |
Launch date | 27 September 2016 | 1 March 2007 |
Place in performance rating | 516 | 515 |
Type | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
Launch price (MSRP) | $99.99 | |
Price now | $99.99 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 3.97 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1266 MHz | 575 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1120 MHz | 575 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 5,834 gflops | |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 90 nm |
Pipelines | 2304 | 24 |
Texture fill rate | 182.3 GTexel / s | 13.8 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt | 45 Watt |
Transistor count | 5,700 million | 278 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | MXM-III |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 9.0c |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 2.1 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 512 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 160.0 GB / s | 38.4 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 700 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz | 1200 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | 256 |
Shared memory | 0 |