HD Graphics 405 vs Quadro CX

Place in performance ranking	798	1124
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.13	0.01
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Gen. 8 (2015−2016)
GPU code name	GT200B	Braswell
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	11 November 2008 (15 years ago)	1 April 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,999	no data
Current price	$17.66 (0x MSRP)	$254

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro CX has 1200% better value for money than HD Graphics 405.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	192	16
Core clock speed	602 MHz	320 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	700 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	189 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	6 Watt
Texture fill rate	38.53	11.20
Floating-point performance	462.3 gflops	213.1 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro CX and HD Graphics 405 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x1
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	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	1536 MB	System Shared
Memory bus width	384 Bit	64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1600 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	76.8 GB/s	no data
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 Connectors

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

No outputs

API compatibility

List of supported graphics 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	4.3
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.1.80
CUDA	1.3	no data

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

50−55
+233%

−233%

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.45	0.72
Recency	11 November 2008	1 April 2016
Maximum RAM amount	1536 MB	System Shared
Chip lithography	55 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	6 Watt