GeForce 210 Rev. 2 vs Quadro FX 5800
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 832 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.02 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.19 | no data |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) |
| GPU code name | GT200B | GT218 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 11 November 2008 (17 years ago) | 12 October 2009 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,499 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 cores | 240 | 16 |
| Core clock speed | 610 MHz | 520 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,400 million | 260 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 189 Watt | 31 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 48.80 | 4.160 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 0.03936 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 4 |
| TMUs | 80 | 8 |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 32 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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 168 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |
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 type | GDDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 512 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 6.4 GB/s |
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 Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video | 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort, 1x VGA |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 11.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | 1.3 | 1.2 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 11 November 2008 | 12 October 2009 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1 GB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 189 Watt | 31 Watt |
FX 5800 has a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.
210 Rev. 2, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 months, a 38% more advanced lithography process, and 510% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Quadro FX 5800 and GeForce 210 Rev. 2. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Quadro FX 5800 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce 210 Rev. 2 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
