ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5145 vs Quadro FX 1800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 1800 with Mobility Radeon HD 5145, including specs and performance data.

FX 1800
2009, $489
768 MB GDDR3, 59 Watt
0.94
+129%

FX 1800 outperforms Mobility HD 5145 by a whopping 129% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11751326
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency1.232.10
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameG94M92
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date30 March 2009 (17 years ago)7 January 2010 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$489 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

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 cores6480
Core clock speed550 MHz720 MHz
Number of transistors505 million242 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)59 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate17.605.760
Floating-point processing power0.176 TFLOPS0.1152 TFLOPS
ROPs124
TMUs328
L1 Cacheno data16 KB
L2 Cache48 KB64 KB

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 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length198 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 typeGDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount768 MB1 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth38.4 GB/s14.4 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.04.1
OpenGL3.33.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.1-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 27 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.94 0.41
Recency 30 March 2009 7 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount 768 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 59 Watt 15 Watt

FX 1800 has a 129% higher aggregate performance score.

ATI Mobility HD 5145, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 months, a 33% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 18% more advanced lithography process, and 293% lower power consumption.

The Quadro FX 1800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 5145 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 1800 is a workstation graphics card while Mobility Radeon HD 5145 is a notebook one.

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.


3.6 145 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 45 votes

Rate Mobility Radeon HD 5145 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 1800 or Mobility Radeon HD 5145, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.