Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Intel HD Graphics 2500 Mobile Quadro FX 1600M
Red Dead Redemption 2 3075% 1954%
Doom Eternal 2630% 1666%
Cyberpunk 2077 4262% 2721%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3075% 1954%
Dragon Ball Z Kakarot 1858% 1167%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 4262% 2721%
Star Wars: Jedi - Fallen Order 4262% 2721%
Grand Theft Auto VI 4752% 3038%
Need For Speed Heat 3075% 1954%
Warcraft 3: Reforged 22% 21%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia Quadro FX 1600M are significantly better than the Intel HD Graphics 2500 Mobile.

The Graphics 2500 was released over three years more recently than the Quadro FX 1600M, and so the Graphics 2500 is likely to have far better driver support, meaning it will be much more optimized and ultimately superior to the Quadro FX 1600M when running the latest games.

The Quadro FX 1600M has 512 MB video memory, but the Graphics 2500 does not have an entry, so the two GPUs cannot be reliably compared in this area.

The Graphics 2500 has 6 Shader Processing Units but the Quadro FX 1600M does not have an entry, so the two GPUs cannot be reliably compared in this area.

The Quadro FX 1600M requires 50 Watts to run but there is no entry for the Graphics 2500.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed650 MHzvs625 MHz
Boost Clock-vs-
ArchitectureIvy BridgeG84M
OC Potential None vs -
Driver Support - vs -
Release Date01 Apr 2012vs01 Jun 2007
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

GPU Memory

MemoryN/Avs512 MB
Memory Speed800 MHzvs800 MHz
Memory Bus128 Bitvs128 Bit
Memory TypeDDR3vsGDDR3
Memory Bandwidth25.6GB/secvs25.6GB/sec
L2 Cache - vs -
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units6vs-
Actual Shader Performance1%vs-
Technology-vs80nm
Texture Mapping Units-vs-
Texture Rate-vs-
Render Output Units-vs-
Pixel Rate-vs-
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)-vs2560x1600
VGA Connections0vs-
DVI Connections0vs-
HDMI Connections0vs-
DisplayPort Connections-vs-
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power-50 Watts
Recommended PSU--

GPU Features

DirectX11vs10
Shader Model5.0vs4.0
Open GL4.0vs2.1
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUyesyes
SLI/Crossfirenovsno
Dedicatednovsyes
Comparison

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended Processor--
Recommended RAM--
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution--

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewThe Quadro line of GPU cards emerged in an effort at market segmentation by NVIDIA. In introducing Quadro, NVIDIA was able to charge a premium for essentially the same graphics hardware in professional markets, and direct resources to properly serve the needs of those markets. To differentiate their offerings, NVIDIA used driver software and firmware to enable features vital to segments of the workstation market; e.g., high performance anti-aliased lines and two-sided lighting were reserved for the Quadro product. In addition, improved support through a certified driver program was put in place. These features were of little value in the gaming markets that NVIDIA's products already sold to, but prevented high end customers from using the less expensive products. This practice continues even today although some products use higher capacity faster memory.
Recommended CPU
-
-
Possible GPU Upgrades
N/A
N/A
GPU Variants
-
-

Title

Body