Quadro FX 4800 vs GeForce GTX 780 Ti

Place in the ranking	226	828
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	6.26	0.05
Power efficiency	6.81	1.17
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	GK110B	GT200B
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	7 November 2013 (11 years ago)	11 November 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$699	$1,799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 780 Ti has 12420% better value for money than FX 4800.

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 cores	2880	192
Core clock speed	875 MHz	602 MHz
Boost clock speed	928 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	7,080 million	1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	150 Watt
Texture fill rate	222.7	38.53
Floating-point processing power	5.345 TFLOPS	0.4623 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	24
TMUs	240	64

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 support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	267 mm	267 mm
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	1x 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	1536 MB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	7.0 GB/s	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	336 GB/s	76.8 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	One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort	1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video
Multi monitor support	4 displays	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

Supported technologies

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

Blu Ray 3D	+	-
3D Gaming	+	-
3D Vision	+	-
3D Vision Live	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_1)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.4	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/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 780 Ti 24.74
+866%

FX 4800 2.56

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 780 Ti 9513
+865%

FX 4800 986

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

96
+967%

9−10

−967%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

7.28
+2645%

199.89

−2645%

GTX 780 Ti has 2645% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +1050%	4−5 −1050%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +900%	5−6 −900%
Elden Ring	80−85 +913%	8−9 −913%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +986%	7−8 −986%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +1050%	4−5 −1050%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +900%	5−6 −900%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +980%	10−11 −980%
Metro Exodus	65−70 +983%	6−7 −983%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +980%	5−6 −980%
Valorant	95−100 +890%	10−11 −890%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +986%	7−8 −986%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +1050%	4−5 −1050%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +900%	5−6 −900%
Dota 2	85−90 +963%	8−9 −963%
Elden Ring	80−85 +913%	8−9 −913%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +986%	7−8 −986%
Fortnite	120−130 +933%	12−14 −933%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +980%	10−11 −980%
Grand Theft Auto V	85−90 +963%	8−9 −963%
Metro Exodus	65−70 +983%	6−7 −983%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 +875%	16−18 −875%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +980%	5−6 −980%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	80−85 +900%	8−9 −900%
Valorant	95−100 +890%	10−11 −890%
World of Tanks	250−260 +971%	24−27 −971%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +986%	7−8 −986%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +1050%	4−5 −1050%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +900%	5−6 −900%
Dota 2	85−90 +963%	8−9 −963%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +986%	7−8 −986%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +980%	10−11 −980%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 +875%	16−18 −875%
Valorant	95−100 +890%	10−11 −890%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	40−45 +925%	4−5 −925%
Elden Ring	40−45 +975%	4−5 −975%
Grand Theft Auto V	40−45 +950%	4−5 −950%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +872%	18−20 −872%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +1050%	2−3 −1050%
World of Tanks	160−170 +925%	16−18 −925%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +900%	5−6 −900%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +950%	2−3 −950%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +950%	2−3 −950%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +929%	7−8 −929%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +1000%	6−7 −1000%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +1020%	5−6 −1020%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +1100%	3−4 −1100%
Valorant	65−70 +1017%	6−7 −1017%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +1000%	2−3 −1000%
Dota 2	40−45 +975%	4−5 −975%
Elden Ring	20−22 +900%	2−3 −900%
Grand Theft Auto V	40−45 +975%	4−5 −975%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +1800%	1−2 −1800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 +971%	7−8 −971%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +1500%	1−2 −1500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +975%	4−5 −975%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +1200%	2−3 −1200%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +1000%	2−3 −1000%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9	0−1
Dota 2	40−45 +975%	4−5 −975%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Fortnite	30−35 +933%	3−4 −933%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +1167%	3−4 −1167%
Valorant	30−35 +967%	3−4 −967%

This is how GTX 780 Ti and FX 4800 compete in popular games:

GTX 780 Ti is 967% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	24.74	2.56
Recency	7 November 2013	11 November 2008
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	1536 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	150 Watt

GTX 780 Ti has a 866.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.

FX 4800, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 780 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 4800 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 780 Ti is a desktop card while Quadro FX 4800 is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.