Your Graphics Research
Your Graphics Research
| Recommended System Requirements | ||
|---|---|---|
| Game | Quadro FX 380 LP | Radeon X1050 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3731% | 7640% |
| Assassins Creed: Valhalla | 3403% | 6979% |
| Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War | 3290% | 6749% |
| Hitman 3 | 4883% | 9968% |
| Grand Theft Auto VI | 5290% | 10790% |
| FIFA 21 | 1832% | 3804% |
| Far Cry 6 | 5442% | 11099% |
| Genshin Impact | 3731% | 7640% |
| World of Warcraft: Shadowlands | 5392% | 10996% |
| Watch Dogs Legion | 3595% | 7366% |
In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia Quadro FX 380 LP are massively better than the AMD Radeon X1050.
The FX 380 was released over three years more recently than the Radeon X1050, and so the FX 380 is likely to have far better driver support, meaning it will be much more optimized and ultimately superior to the Radeon X1050 when running the latest games.
Both GPUs exhibit very poor performance, so rather than upgrading from one to the other you should consider looking at more powerful GPUs. Neither of these will be able to run the latest games in any playable way.
The FX 380 has 384 MB more video memory than the Radeon X1050, so is likely to be slightly better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. This is supported by the fact that the FX 380 also has superior memory performance overall.
The FX 380 has 7.5 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the Radeon X1050, which means that the memory performance of the FX 380 is marginally better than the Radeon X1050.
The Quadro FX 380 LP has 16 Shader Processing Units and the Radeon X1050 has 4. However, the actual shader performance of the FX 380 is 6 and the actual shader performance of the Radeon X1050 is 1. The FX 380 having 5 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the FX 380 delivers a marginally smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the Radeon X1050.
The FX 380 transistor size technology is 70 nm (nanometers) smaller than the Radeon X1050. This means that the FX 380 is expected to run massively cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the Radeon X1050. While they exhibit similar graphical performance, the FX 380 should consume less power than the Radeon X1050.
The Quadro FX 380 LP requires 28 Watts to run and the Radeon X1050 requires 24 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 350 Watts for the FX 380 and a PSU with at least 300 Watts for the Radeon X1050. The FX 380 requires 4 Watts more than the Radeon X1050 to run. The difference is not significant enough for the FX 380 to have a noticeably larger impact on your yearly electricity bills than the Radeon X1050.
| Core Speed | 400 MHz |  | vs | | 400 MHz |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boost Clock | - | vs | - | ||
| Architecture | GT218GL | RV370 | |||
| OC Potential | - | vs |
| Fair | |
| Driver Support | - | vs | - | ||
| Release Date | 30 Dec 2009 | | vs | 07 Dec 2006 | |
| GPU Link | GD Link | GD Link | |||
| Approved | | | |||
| Comparison | |||||
| Memory | 512 MB | | vs | 128 MB | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Memory Speed | 800 MHz | | vs | 333 MHz | |
| Memory Bus | 64 Bit | | vs | | 64 Bit |
| Memory Type | DDR3 | | vs | DDR2 | |
| Memory Bandwidth | 12.8GB/sec | | vs | 5.3GB/sec | |
| L2 Cache | - | vs | - | ||
| Delta Color Compression | no | vs | no | ||
| Memory Performance | 0% | |
vs | |
0% |
| Comparison | |||||
| Shader Processing Units | 16 | | vs | 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual Shader Performance | 0% | | vs | | 0% |
| Technology | 40nm | | vs | 110nm | |
| Texture Mapping Units | - | vs | | 4 | |
| Texture Rate | - | vs | | 1.6 GTexel/s | |
| Render Output Units | - | vs | | 4 | |
| Pixel Rate | - | vs | | 1.6 GPixel/s | |
| Comparison | |||||
| Max Digital Resolution (WxH) | 2560x1600 | | vs | | 2560x1600 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VGA Connections | 1 | | vs | | 1 |
| DVI Connections | 1 | | vs | | 1 |
| HDMI Connections | 0 | vs | 0 | ||
| DisplayPort Connections | - | vs | - | ||
| Comparison | |||||
| Max Power | 28 Watts | vs | | 24 Watts | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recommended PSU | 350 Watts | vs | | 300 Watts & 18 Amps | |
| DirectX | 10.1 | | vs | 9 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shader Model | 4.1 | | vs | 2.0 | |
| Open GL | 3.2 | | vs | 2.0 | |
| Open CL | - | vs | - | ||
| Notebook GPU | no | no | |||
| SLI/Crossfire | no | vs | no | ||
| Dedicated | yes | | vs | | yes |
| Comparison | |||||
| Recommended Processor | - | - | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recommended RAM | - | - | |||
| Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution | - | - | |||
| Performance Value |  | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mini Review | Built for Professionals and designed for desktop and small form factor systems, NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 LP provides more than 2X higher professional graphics performance over consumer graphics cards. Featuring the NVIDIA CUDA parallel computing architecture and certified on leading CAD and DCC applications, Quadro FX 380 LP meets stringent performance and reliability requirements, while staying within budget. | Radeon X1050 is an entry-level GFX based on the 110nm variant of the R300 architecture. It's based on the RV370 Core and offers 4 Pixel Shaders, 4 TMUs and 4 ROPs, on a 64-bit of standard DDR2. The central unit runs at 400MHz and the memory clock operates at up to 333MHz. Expect a TDP of up to 24 Watt. Radeon X1050 is not related to the rest of the X1000 Series GPUs due to being based on the R300 architecture and not on the R500. Its performance is relatively limited - even for DirectX 9 based games. As it's not based on a Shader-Unified architecture, both DirectX 10 & 11 games aren't supported. | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recommended CPU | - | - | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Possible GPU Upgrades | - | - | |||
| GPU Variants | - | - | |||