Matrox Parhelia 256 MB vs Quadro FX 1800

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1096not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.03no data
Power efficiency1.21no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Parhelia (2002−2006)
GPU code nameG94Parhelia-512
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date30 March 2009 (15 years ago)25 June 2002 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$489 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 cores64no data
Core clock speed550 MHz200 MHz
Number of transistors505 million80 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)59 Wattno data
Texture fill rate17.600.8
Floating-point processing power0.176 TFLOPSno data
ROPs124
TMUs324

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16AGP 4x
Length198 mm175 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR3DDR
Maximum RAM amount768 MB256 MB
Memory bus width192 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz250 MHz
Memory bandwidth38.4 GB/s16 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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort2x DVI

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)8.1
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.31.5
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 30 March 2009 25 June 2002
Maximum RAM amount 768 MB 256 MB
Chip lithography 65 nm 150 nm

FX 1800 has an age advantage of 6 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 130.8% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Quadro FX 1800 and Matrox Parhelia 256 MB. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro FX 1800 is a workstation graphics card while Matrox Parhelia 256 MB 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 FX 1800
Quadro FX 1800
Matrox Parhelia 256 MB
Parhelia 256 MB

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.


3.5 133 votes

Rate Quadro FX 1800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.6 10 votes

Rate Matrox Parhelia 256 MB 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.