Quadro FX 1800M vs GeForce GT 525M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 525M with Quadro FX 1800M, including specs and performance data.

GT 525M
2011
1 GB DDR3, 23 Watt
1.02

1800M outperforms 525M by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11251094
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.582.01
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGF108GT215
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date5 January 2011 (14 years ago)15 June 2009 (16 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 cores9672
Core clock speed475 MHz561 MHz
Number of transistors585 million727 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate7.60013.46
Floating-point processing power0.1824 TFLOPS0.162 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs1624
L1 Cache128 KBno data
L2 Cache256 KB64 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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz550 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/s35.2 GB/s
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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 API11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA++

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.

GT 525M 1.02
FX 1800M 1.12
+9.8%

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.

GT 525M 451
Samples: 1755
FX 1800M 494
+9.5%
Samples: 247

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.

GT 525M 3840
+11.2%
FX 1800M 3452

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:

900p13
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Full HD21
+0%
21−24
+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 0−1 1−2
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 0−1 1−2
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
−7.7%
27−30
+7.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Dota 2 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Valorant 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 0−1 1−2
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Dota 2 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Valorant 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Valorant 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 1−2
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 0−1 1−2
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
High

Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1

This is how GT 525M and FX 1800M compete in popular games:

  • FX 1800M is 8% faster in 900p
  • A tie in 1080p

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the FX 1800M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • FX 1800M performs better in 18 tests (41%)
  • there's a draw in 26 tests (59%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.02 1.12
Recency 5 January 2011 15 June 2009
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 45 Watt

GT 525M has an age advantage of 1 year, and 95.7% lower power consumption.

FX 1800M, on the other hand, has a 9.8% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GT 525M and Quadro FX 1800M.

Be aware that GeForce GT 525M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 1800M is a mobile workstation one.

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 GT 525M
GeForce GT 525M
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800M
Quadro FX 1800M

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.


3.4 409 votes

Rate GeForce GT 525M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 6 votes

Rate Quadro FX 1800M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 525M or Quadro FX 1800M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.