GeForce4 Ti 4800 vs Quadro 2000M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 2000M with GeForce4 Ti 4800, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 2000M
2011
2 GB DDR3, 55 Watt
2.02
+20100%

2000M outperforms GeForce4 Ti 4800 by a whopping 20100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8881504
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.28no data
Power efficiency2.52no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Kelvin (2001−2003)
GPU code nameGF106NV28 A1
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date13 January 2011 (13 years ago)15 March 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$46.56 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores192no data
Core clock speed550 MHz300 MHz
Number of transistors1,170 million36 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Wattno data
Texture fill rate17.602.400
Floating-point processing power0.4224 TFLOPSno data
ROPs164
TMUs328

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)AGP 8x
Lengthno data216 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR3DDR
Maximum RAM amount2 GB128 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz325 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/s10.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)8.1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.61.3
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.1-

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.

Quadro 2000M 2.02
+20100%
GeForce4 Ti 4800 0.01

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.

Quadro 2000M 778
+15460%
GeForce4 Ti 4800 5

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 HD37-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.26no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8 0−1
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8 0−1
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6 0−1

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.02 0.01
Recency 13 January 2011 15 March 2003
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 150 nm

Quadro 2000M has a 20100% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 275% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro 2000M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce4 Ti 4800 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 2000M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce4 Ti 4800 is a desktop 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 Quadro 2000M
Quadro 2000M
NVIDIA GeForce4 Ti 4800
GeForce4 Ti 4800

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.


3.7 94 votes

Rate Quadro 2000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 14 votes

Rate GeForce4 Ti 4800 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.