Quadro FX 2500M vs ATI FirePro M5800

Place in the ranking	1002	1218
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	3.81	0.86
Architecture	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)	Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code name	Madison	G71
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	1 March 2010 (14 years ago)	29 September 2005 (19 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$99.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores	400	32
Core clock speed	650 MHz	500 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	500 MHz
Number of transistors	627 million	278 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	26 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	13.00	12.00
Floating-point processing power	0.52 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	8	16
TMUs	20	24

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 size	medium sized	large
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	MXM-III

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	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	600 MHz
Memory bandwidth	51.2 GB/s	38.4 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model	5.0	3.0
OpenGL	4.4	2.1
OpenCL	1.2	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD

21
+163%

8−9

−163%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

12.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Dota 2	2−3	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
Fortnite	6−7	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Grand Theft Auto V	2−3	0−1
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
World of Tanks	30−33 +76.5%	16−18 −76.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +11.1%	9−10 −11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Dota 2	2−3	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
World of Tanks	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Forza Horizon 5	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Valorant	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +6.7%	14−16 −6.7%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +6.7%	14−16 −6.7%
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Valorant	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

This is how ATI M5800 and FX 2500M compete in popular games:

ATI M5800 is 163% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in World of Tanks, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the ATI M5800 is 700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

ATI M5800 is ahead in 27 tests (79%)
there's a draw in 7 tests (21%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.44	0.56
Recency	1 March 2010	29 September 2005
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	40 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	26 Watt	45 Watt

ATI M5800 has a 157.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 125% more advanced lithography process, and 73.1% lower power consumption.

The FirePro M5800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2500M in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.