Quadro P520 vs GeForce 8600M GT

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8600M GT with Quadro P520, including specs and performance data.

8600M GT
2007
512 MB DDR2, 20 Watt
0.29

P520 outperforms 8600M GT by a whopping 1772% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1337612
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.9920.70
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameG84GP108
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date31 December 2007 (16 years ago)23 May 2019 (5 years ago)

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 cores32384
Core clock speed475 MHz1303 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1493 MHz
Number of transistors289 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate7.60035.83
Floating-point processing power0.0608 TFLOPS1.147 TFLOPS
ROPs816
TMUs1624

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
InterfaceMXM-IIPCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed400 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/s48.06 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA1.16.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

8600M GT 0.29
Quadro P520 5.43
+1772%

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.

8600M GT 112
Quadro P520 2092
+1768%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

8600M GT 1040
Quadro P520 15720
+1412%

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 HD1−2
−2000%
21
+2000%
4K1−2
−2200%
23
+2200%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Hitman 3 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−325%
30−35
+325%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−375%
18−20
+375%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−71.4%
45−50
+71.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Hitman 3 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−325%
30−35
+325%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−375%
18−20
+375%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−100%
18−20
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−71.4%
45−50
+71.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Hitman 3 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−325%
30−35
+325%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−375%
18−20
+375%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−22.2%
11
+22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−71.4%
45−50
+71.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 2−3
Hitman 3 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 2−3

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how 8600M GT and Quadro P520 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P520 is 2000% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P520 is 2200% faster in 4K

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

  • in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro P520 is 500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro P520 is ahead in 29 tests (44%)
  • there's a draw in 37 tests (56%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.29 5.43
Recency 31 December 2007 23 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 80 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 18 Watt

Quadro P520 has a 1772.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 471.4% more advanced lithography process, and 11.1% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P520 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8600M GT in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 8600M GT is a notebook graphics card while Quadro P520 is a mobile workstation one.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT
GeForce 8600M GT
NVIDIA Quadro P520
Quadro P520

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.5 25 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 104 votes

Rate Quadro P520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.