Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics vs Quadro FX 3800

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking950not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.04no data
Power efficiency1.42no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Gen. 5 Arrandale (2010)
GPU code nameGT200BGMA HD
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date30 March 2009 (17 years ago)10 January 2010 (16 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 cores19212
Core clock speed600 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nm45 nm
Power consumption (TDP)108 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate38.40no data
Floating-point processing power0.4623 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs64no data
L2 Cache128 KBno data

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length198 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount1 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed800 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)10
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA1.3-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 30 March 2009 10 January 2010
Chip lithography 55 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 108 Watt 35 Watt

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics has an age advantage of 9 months, a 22% more advanced lithography process, and 209% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro FX 3800 and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3800 is a workstation graphics card while Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics 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.


3.1 51 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 146 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 3800 or Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.