Quadro FX 880M vs GeForce GTX 765M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 765M with Quadro FX 880M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 765M
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
5.18
+793%

GTX 765M outperforms FX 880M by a whopping 793% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6121202
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.801.15
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGK106GT216
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date30 May 2013 (11 years ago)7 January 2010 (14 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 cores76848
Core clock speed850 MHz550 MHz
Boost clock speed863 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,540 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate55.238.800
Floating-point processing power1.326 TFLOPS0.1162 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs6416

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-A (3.0)
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
Standard memory configurationGDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz790 MHz
Memory bandwidth64.0 GB/s25.28 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
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI+-
HDCP content protection+-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+-

Supported technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Support+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
3D Vision / 3DTV Play+-

API compatibility

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
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA+1.2

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 765M 5.18
+793%
FX 880M 0.58

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 765M 1997
+796%
FX 880M 223

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.

GTX 765M 14870
+464%
FX 880M 2639

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:

900p51
+920%
5−6
−920%
Full HD39
+95%
20
−95%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6 0−1
Battlefield 5 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+1000%
3−4
−1000%
Hitman 3 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+56.7%
30−33
−56.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6 0−1
Battlefield 5 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+1000%
3−4
−1000%
Hitman 3 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+80%
10−11
−80%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+56.7%
30−33
−56.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+1000%
3−4
−1000%
Hitman 3 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+200%
10−12
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+80%
10−11
−80%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+56.7%
30−33
−56.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Hitman 3 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+3200%
1−2
−3200%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4 0−1
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

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

This is how GTX 765M and FX 880M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 765M is 920% faster in 900p
  • GTX 765M is 95% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 765M is 3200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 765M surpassed FX 880M in all 35 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.18 0.58
Recency 30 May 2013 7 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 35 Watt

GTX 765M has a 793.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

FX 880M, on the other hand, has 114.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 765M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 880M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 765M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 880M 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 GTX 765M
GeForce GTX 765M
NVIDIA Quadro FX 880M
Quadro FX 880M

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.


3.8 70 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 765M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 41 vote

Rate Quadro FX 880M 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.