FirePro M4150 vs Quadro CX

Place in the ranking	877	866
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.05	no data
Power efficiency	1.12	no data
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code name	GT200B	Opal
Market segment	Workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	11 November 2008 (16 years ago)	16 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,999	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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	192	384
Core clock speed	602 MHz	715 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	950 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	38.53	17.16
Floating-point processing power	0.4623 TFLOPS	0.5491 TFLOPS
ROPs	24	8
TMUs	64	24

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	PCIe 3.0 x8
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no data

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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1536 MB	1 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	76.8 GB/s	64 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 Connectors

1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video

No outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (11_1)
Shader Model	4.0	5.1
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
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.

Quadro CX 2.38

FirePro M4150 2.50
+5%

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 CX 947

FirePro M4150 994
+5%

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	2.38	2.50
Recency	11 November 2008	16 October 2013
Maximum RAM amount	1536 MB	1 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	28 nm

Quadro CX has a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

FirePro M4150, on the other hand, has a 5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro CX and FirePro M4150.

Be aware that Quadro CX is a workstation card while FirePro M4150 is a mobile workstation one.