Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Radeon R4 7310 Quadro FX 1600M
Red Dead Redemption 2 1546% 1954%
Cyberpunk 2077 2162% 2721%
Doom Eternal 1315% 1666%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1546% 1954%
Dragon Ball Z Kakarot 915% 1167%
Halo: Reach 423% 553%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2162% 2721%
Star Wars: Jedi - Fallen Order 2162% 2721%
Grand Theft Auto VI 2415% 3038%
Need For Speed Heat 1546% 1954%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the AMD Radeon R4 7310 are noticeably better than the Nvidia Quadro FX 1600M.

The Radeon R4 7310 was released over three years more recently than the Quadro FX 1600M, and so the Radeon R4 7310 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 Radeon R4 7310 does not have an entry, so the two GPUs cannot be reliably compared in this area.

The Radeon R4 7310 has 128 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 Radeon R4 7310 transistor size technology is 52 nm (nanometers) smaller than the Quadro FX 1600M. This means that the Radeon R4 7310 is expected to run massively cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the Quadro FX 1600M. While they exhibit similar graphical performance, the Radeon R4 7310 should consume less power than the Quadro FX 1600M.

The Radeon R4 7310 requires 15 Watts to run and the Quadro FX 1600M requires 50 Watts. The Quadro FX 1600M requires 35 Watts more than the Radeon R4 7310 to run. The difference is significant enough that the Quadro FX 1600M may have a slight adverse affect on your yearly electricity bills in comparison to the Radeon R4 7310.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed800 MHzvs625 MHz
Boost Clock-vs-
ArchitecturePuma+G84M
OC Potential None vs -
Driver Support - vs -
Release Date06 May 2015vs01 Jun 2007
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

GPU Memory

MemoryN/Avs512 MB
Memory Speed800 MHzvs800 MHz
Memory Bus64 Bitvs128 Bit
Memory TypeDDR3vsGDDR3
Memory Bandwidth12.8GB/secvs25.6GB/sec
L2 Cache 0 KB green tick vs -
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units128vs-
Actual Shader Performance3%vs-
Technology28nmvs80nm
Texture Mapping Units8vs-
Texture Rate6.4 GTexel/svs-
Render Output Units4vs-
Pixel Rate3.2 GPixel/svs-
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)4096x2160vs2560x1600
VGA Connections0vs-
DVI Connections0vs-
HDMI Connections0vs-
DisplayPort Connections0vs-
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power15 Wattsvs50 Watts
Recommended PSU--

GPU Features

DirectX11.2vs10
Shader Model5.0vs4.0
Open GL4.3vs2.1
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUyesyes
SLI/Crossfirenovsno
Dedicatednovsyes
Comparison

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended Processor APU A6-7310 Quad-Core-
Recommended RAM4 GB-
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution1280x720-

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewRadeon R4 7310 is an integrated Graphics Card in the APU A6-7310.

It is based on the Graphics Core Next Architecture and offers 128 Shader Processing Units, 8 TMUs and 4 ROPs. While the central unit is set at 800MHz, the memory bus-width will depend on whether or not the system's RAM is dual-channeled and the operating memory clock, on its frequency. Thus, it can be either 64-bit or 128-bit and up to 800MHz.
The Graphics Card also shares the processor's L2 Cache of 2MB. Therefore, it reduces the need to resort to its memory bandwidth.

Overall, the Graphics Card's performance depends a lot on the system configuration. Best case scenario, expect performance similar to an integrated Intel HD 4200.
The card is only suited for gaming below 720p and all modern demanding games can be played at least on low settings.
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