Quadro FX 3800 vs GeForce GTX 460

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 460 with Quadro FX 3800, including specs and performance data.

GTX 460
2010
2 GB GDDR5, 160 Watt
5.87
+174%

GTX 460 outperforms FX 3800 by a whopping 174% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking595866
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.250.08
Power efficiency2.521.36
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGF104GT200B
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date12 July 2010 (14 years ago)30 March 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 460 has 1463% better value for money than FX 3800.

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 cores336192
Core clock speed675 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt108 Watt
Texture fill rate37.8038.40
Floating-point processing power0.9072 TFLOPS0.4623 TFLOPS
ROPs2416
TMUs5664

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 support16x PCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length210 mm198 mm
Height4.376"(111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin1x 6-pin
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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB1 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth86.4 GB/s51.2 GB/s

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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMI1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.13.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+1.3

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 460 5.87
+174%
FX 3800 2.14

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 460 2262
+175%
FX 3800 824

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.87 2.14
Recency 12 July 2010 30 March 2009
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 108 Watt

GTX 460 has a 174.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.

FX 3800, on the other hand, has 48.1% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 460 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3800 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 460 is a desktop card while Quadro FX 3800 is a 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 GTX 460
GeForce GTX 460
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800
Quadro FX 3800

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.


3.4 1010 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 460 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 50 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3800 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.