GeForce 8600M GS vs Quadro FX 1400

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 1400 with GeForce 8600M GS, including specs and performance data.

FX 1400
2004, $799
128 MB DDR, 55 Watt
0.30
+42.9%

FX 1400 outperforms 8600M GS by a considerable 43% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking14061461
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.420.81
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameNV41G86
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date9 August 2004 (22 years ago)1 May 2007 (19 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA coresno data16
Core clock speed350 MHz450 MHz
Number of transistors222 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate4.2003.600
Floating-point processing powerno data0.0288 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs128
L2 Cacheno data32 KB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16MXM-II
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDRDDR2
Maximum RAM amount128 MB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed300 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth19.2 GB/s12.8 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX9.0c (9_3)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model3.04.0
OpenGL2.13.3
OpenCLN/A1.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA-1.1

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

FX 1400 0.30
+42.9%
8600M GS 0.21

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

FX 1400 124
+40.9%
Samples: 59
8600M GS 88
Samples: 313

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Palworld 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Palworld 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Palworld 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Palworld 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic

Palworld 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 25 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.30 0.21
Recency 9 August 2004 1 May 2007
Maximum RAM amount 128 MB 512 MB
Chip lithography 130 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 20 Watt

FX 1400 has a 43% higher aggregate performance score.

8600M GS, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 63% more advanced lithography process, and 175% lower power consumption.

The Quadro FX 1400 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8600M GS in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 1400 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce 8600M GS is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.5 35 votes

Rate Quadro FX 1400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 39 votes

Rate GeForce 8600M GS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 1400 or GeForce 8600M GS, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.