GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE vs GeForce GTX 1080

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1080 and GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1080
2016
8 GB GDDR5X, 180 Watt
40.28
+201300%

GTX 1080 outperforms GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE by a whopping 201300% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1031494
Place by popularity49not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation19.50no data
Power efficiency15.60no data
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Kelvin (2001−2003)
GPU code nameGP104NV28 A2
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date27 May 2016 (8 years ago)16 February 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 no data

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 cores2560no data
Core clock speed1607 MHz275 MHz
Boost clock speed1733 MHzno data
Number of transistors7,200 million36 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)180 Wattno data
Maximum GPU temperature94 °Cno data
Texture fill rate277.32.200
Floating-point processing power8.873 TFLOPSno data
ROPs644
TMUs1608

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16AGP 8x
Length267 mm216 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)500 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5XSDR
Maximum RAM amount8 GB128 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed10 GB/s275 MHz
Memory bandwidth320 GB/s4.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsDP 1.42, HDMI 2.0b, DL-DVI1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boost3.0no data
VR Ready+no data
Ansel+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)8.1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.51.3
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA+-

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.

GTX 1080 40.28
+201300%
GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE 0.02

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.

GTX 1080 15538
+258867%
GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE 6

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 HD126-0−1
1440p77-0−1
4K57-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.75no data
1440p7.78no data
4K10.51no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 92 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70 0−1
Battlefield 5 145 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 105 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 0−1
Far Cry 5 123 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 135 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 320 0−1
Hitman 3 85−90 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170 0−1
Metro Exodus 144 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 114 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 186 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 137 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70 0−1
Battlefield 5 128 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 95 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 0−1
Far Cry 5 98 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 105 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 291 0−1
Hitman 3 85−90 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170 0−1
Metro Exodus 131 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 109 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 140−150 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 152 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 63 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 71 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 0−1
Far Cry 5 75 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 112 0−1
Hitman 3 85−90 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 121 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 140−150 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 81 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 105 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 89 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 74 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 49 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 51 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35 0−1
Far Cry 5 53 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 282 0−1
Hitman 3 50−55 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 92 0−1
Metro Exodus 82 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 95−100 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 190−200 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 81 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 43 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 39 0−1
Hitman 3 30−35 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 180−190 0−1
Metro Exodus 47 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 56 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 33 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 29 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16 0−1
Far Cry 5 27 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 65 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 42 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 40.28 0.02
Recency 27 May 2016 16 February 2003
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 16 nm 150 nm

GTX 1080 has a 201300% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 837.5% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1080 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE in performance tests.


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 GTX 1080
GeForce GTX 1080
NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE
GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE

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.


4.3 5289 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1080 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 30 votes

Rate GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE 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.