GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile vs Quadro FX 1300

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 1300 with GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FX 1300
2004
128 MB DDR, 55 Watt
0.09

RTX 3080 Mobile outperforms FX 1300 by a whopping 47267% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking146795
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.1125.46
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameNV38GA104
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date9 August 2004 (20 years ago)12 January 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 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

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 coresno data6144
Core clock speed350 MHz1110 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1545 MHz
Number of transistors135 million17,400 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt115 Watt
Texture fill rate2.800296.6
Floating-point processing powerno data18.98 TFLOPS
ROPs496
TMUs8192
Tensor Coresno data192
Ray Tracing Coresno data48

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeDDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount128 MB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed275 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth17.6 GB/s448.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0a12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A2.0
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA-8.6
DLSS-+

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.

FX 1300 0.09
RTX 3080 Mobile 42.63
+47267%

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.

FX 1300 34
RTX 3080 Mobile 16423
+48203%

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-0−1119
1440p-0−172
4K-0−145

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 179
+0%
179
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 103
+0%
103
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 121
+0%
121
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 140
+0%
140
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 91
+0%
91
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 96
+0%
96
+0%
Far Cry 5 129
+0%
129
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 194
+0%
194
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 148
+0%
148
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 85
+0%
85
+0%
Battlefield 5 140
+0%
140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 86
+0%
86
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 84
+0%
84
+0%
Dota 2 134
+0%
134
+0%
Far Cry 5 122
+0%
122
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 188
+0%
188
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 135
+0%
135
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 131
+0%
131
+0%
Metro Exodus 100
+0%
100
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 191
+0%
191
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 134
+0%
134
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 63
+0%
63
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 76
+0%
76
+0%
Dota 2 128
+0%
128
+0%
Far Cry 5 114
+0%
114
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 157
+0%
157
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 106
+0%
106
+0%
Valorant 179
+0%
179
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 94
+0%
94
+0%
Metro Exodus 58
+0%
58
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 108
+0%
108
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 36
+0%
36
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 48
+0%
48
+0%
Far Cry 5 103
+0%
103
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130
+0%
130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 79
+0%
79
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 93
+0%
93
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 70
+0%
70
+0%
Valorant 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 67
+0%
67
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+0%
23
+0%
Dota 2 110
+0%
110
+0%
Far Cry 5 55
+0%
55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 87
+0%
87
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.09 42.63
Recency 9 August 2004 12 January 2021
Maximum RAM amount 128 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 115 Watt

FX 1300 has 109.1% lower power consumption.

RTX 3080 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 47266.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1525% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 1300 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 1300 is a workstation card while GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile is a notebook one.

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 FX 1300
Quadro FX 1300
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile
GeForce RTX 3080

Other comparisons

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Quadro FX 1300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 810 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 1300 or GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.