Quadro P500 vs GeForce GTX 280M

Place in performance ranking	937	648
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.17	2.43
Architecture	G9x (2007−2010)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	N10E-GTX	GP108
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	2 March 2009 (15 years ago)	14 November 2017 (6 years ago)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro P500 has 1329% better value for money than GTX 280M.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	128	256
Core clock speed	585 MHz	1455 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1519 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	18 Watt
Texture fill rate	37.44	21.25
Floating-point performance	374.5 gflops	679.9 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 280M and Quadro P500 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	large	large
Interface	MXM-IV	PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	950 MHz	5012 MHz
Memory bandwidth	60.8 GB/s	32.1 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

3x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12.1
Shader Model	4.0	5.1
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.1.0.1
CUDA	+	6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 280M 1.49

Quadro P500 4.21
+183%

Quadro P500 outperforms GeForce GTX 280M by 183% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 26%

GTX 280M 575

Quadro P500 1624
+182%

Quadro P500 outperforms GeForce GTX 280M by 182% in Passmark.

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

8−9

−188%

23
+188%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

−75%

7−8
+75%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −650%	15 +650%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −533%	18−20 +533%
Hitman 3	4−5 −100%	8−9 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −90.9%	21−24 +90.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −450%	10−12 +450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −100%	14−16 +100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	12−14 −66.7%	20−22 +66.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −600%	14 +600%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −533%	18−20 +533%
Hitman 3	4−5 −100%	8−9 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −90.9%	21−24 +90.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −450%	10−12 +450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −100%	14−16 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −180%	14 +180%
Watch Dogs: Legion	12−14 −66.7%	20−22 +66.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −300%	8 +300%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −533%	18−20 +533%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −90.9%	21−24 +90.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −100%	14−16 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −60%	8 +60%
Watch Dogs: Legion	12−14 −66.7%	20−22 +66.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−450%

10−12
+450%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −60%	8−9 +60%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Hitman 3	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−100%

8−9
+100%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	2−3
Far Cry 5	0−1	2−3
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−66.7%

5−6
+66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Battlefield 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Battlefield 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla

3−4

+0%

3−4

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Hitman 3	0−1	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

This is how GTX 280M and Quadro P500 compete in popular games:

Quadro P500 is 188% faster in 1080p

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

in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro P500 is 650% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Quadro P500 is ahead in 49 tests (79%)
there's a draw in 13 tests (21%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.49	4.21
Recency	2 March 2009	14 November 2017
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	18 Watt

Quadro P500 has a 182.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 316.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P500 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 280M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 280M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro P500 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.