Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Quadro FX 1600M Quadro FX 1500M
Red Dead Redemption 2 1954% 2992%
Cyberpunk 2077 2721% 4149%
Doom Eternal 1666% 2559%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1954% 2992%
Dragon Ball Z Kakarot 1167% 1808%
Halo: Reach 553% 883%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2721% 4149%
Star Wars: Jedi - Fallen Order 2721% 4149%
Grand Theft Auto VI 3038% 4625%
Need For Speed Heat 1954% 2992%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia Quadro FX 1600M are significantly better than the Nvidia Quadro FX 1500M.

The Quadro FX 1600M was released over a year more recently than the Quadro FX 1500M, and so the Quadro FX 1600M is likely to have better driver support, meaning it will be more optimized for running the latest games when compared to the Quadro FX 1500M.

The Quadro FX 1600M and the Quadro FX 1500M have the same amount of video memory, but are likely to provide slightly different experiences when displaying game textures at high resolutions.

The Quadro FX 1500M has 6.4 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the Quadro FX 1600M, which means that the memory performance of the Quadro FX 1500M is marginally better than the Quadro FX 1600M.

Both the Quadro FX 1600M and the Quadro FX 1500M have 0 Shader Processing Units. The two GPUs are based on different architectures, but deliver an equivalent shader performance. To compare, we must continue to look at the memory bandwidth, Texture and Pixel Rates. In this case, we sadly do not have enough data in this area to complete the comparison.

The Quadro FX 1600M requires 50 Watts to run and the Quadro FX 1500M requires 45 Watts. The Quadro FX 1600M requires 5 Watts more than the Quadro FX 1500M to run. The difference is not significant enough for the Quadro FX 1600M to have a noticeably larger impact on your yearly electricity bills than the Quadro FX 1500M.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed625 MHzvs375 MHz
Boost Clock-vs-
ArchitectureG84MG71GLM
OC Potential - vs -
Driver Support - vs -
Release Date01 Jun 2007vs18 Apr 2006
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

GPU Memory

Memory512 MBvs512 MB
Memory Speed800 MHzvs500 MHz
Memory Bus128 Bitvs256 Bit
Memory TypeGDDR3vsGDDR3
Memory Bandwidth25.6GB/secvs32GB/sec
L2 Cache - vs -
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units-vs-
Actual Shader Performance-vs-
Technology80nmvs-
Texture Mapping Units-vs-
Texture Rate-vs-
Render Output Units-vs-
Pixel Rate-vs-
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)2560x1600vs2560x1600
VGA Connections-vs-
DVI Connections-vs-
HDMI Connections-vs-
DisplayPort Connections-vs-
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power50 Wattsvs45 Watts
Recommended PSU--

GPU Features

DirectX10vs10
Shader Model4.0vs4.0
Open GL2.1vs2.1
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUyesyes
SLI/Crossfirenovsno
Dedicatedyesvsyes
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.The 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