Quadro FX 4000 vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4330
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 4330 with Quadro FX 4000, including specs and performance data.
Mobility HD 4330 outperforms FX 4000 by a substantial 33% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1379 | 1433 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 0.13 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | M92 | NV40 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 9 January 2009 (17 years ago) | 1 April 2004 (22 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $2,199 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 80 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 450 MHz | 375 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 242 million | 222 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 142 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 3.600 | 4.500 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.072 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 8 |
| TMUs | 8 | 12 |
| L1 Cache | 16 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 64 KB | no data |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | AGP 8x |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 2x Molex |
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 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 600 MHz | 500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 9.6 GB/s | 32 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+44.4%
|
18−20
−44.4%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
+40%
|
10−11
−40%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+44.4%
|
18−20
−44.4%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+44.4%
|
18−20
−44.4%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+40%
|
10−11
−40%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.32 | 0.24 |
| Recency | 9 January 2009 | 1 April 2004 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 256 MB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 130 nm |
ATI Mobility HD 4330 has a 33% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 136% more advanced lithography process.
The Mobility Radeon HD 4330 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 4000 in performance tests.
Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 4330 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 4000 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
