Radeon HD 7770M vs Quadro FX 1800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
1000 1100 1300 1400 1500 1700 1700 Mac Edition 1800
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
7290 7330M 7350M 7370M 7400G 7410M 7420G 7430M 7450A 7450M 7470A 7470M 7490M 7500G 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics 7510M 7520G 7520G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics 7530M 7550M 7560G IGP 7570M 7590M 7600G 7610M 7620G 7630M 7640G 7640G + HD 7610M Dual Graphics 7640G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics 7650A 7650M 7650M Rebrand 7660G 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics 7670A 7670M 7670M Rebrand 7690M 7690M Rebrand 7690M XT 7690M XT Rebrand 7730M 7750M 7770M 7850M 7870M 7950M 7970M 7970M Crossfire 7970M X2

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 1800 with Radeon HD 7770M, including specs and performance data.

FX 1800
2009
768 MB GDDR3, 59 Watt
0.89

HD 7770M outperforms FX 1800 by a whopping 236% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
FX 1800 FX 1800
HD 7770M HD 7770M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1166792
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency1.227.56
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameG94Chelsea
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date30 March 2009 (16 years ago)24 April 2012 (13 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 cores64512
Core clock speed550 MHz675 MHz
Number of transistors505 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)59 Watt32 Watt
Texture fill rate17.6021.60
Floating-point processing power0.176 TFLOPS0.6912 TFLOPS
ROPs1216
TMUs3232
L1 Cacheno data128 KB
L2 Cache48 KB256 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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount768 MB1 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth38.4 GB/s64 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)12 (11_1)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
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

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 57 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.89 2.99
Recency 30 March 2009 24 April 2012
Maximum RAM amount 768 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 59 Watt 32 Watt

HD 7770M has a 236% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 84.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 7770M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 1800 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 1800 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 7770M 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 1800
Quadro FX 1800
AMD Radeon HD 7770M
Radeon HD 7770M
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

FX 1800 Quadro FX 1800
vs
FX 4600 Quadro FX 4600
HD 7770M Radeon HD 7770M
vs
GT 750M GeForce GT 750M
FX 1800 Quadro FX 1800
vs
FX 3700 Quadro FX 3700
FX 380 LP NVIDIA FX 380 LP
vs
GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB 1050 Mobile 3 GB
NVS 295 NVIDIA NVS 295
vs
Apple M3 Pro 18-Core GPU 18-Core GPU
FX 580 NVIDIA FX 580
vs
GT 220M 220M
FX 580 NVIDIA FX 580
vs
UHD Graphics 600 600
Tesla T10 Processor Tesla T10 Processor
vs
A800 PCIe 40 GB 40 GB
FX 1800 NVIDIA FX 1800
vs
GT 420M 420M
FX 1800 NVIDIA FX 1800
vs
ATI HD 4650 4650
FX 380 NVIDIA FX 380
vs
9800 GT Rebrand 9800 GT Rebrand
FX 3800 NVIDIA FX 3800
vs
Radeon 530 530
FX 3800 NVIDIA FX 3800
vs
GTX 1650 TU116 1650 TU116

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
4.4 8 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7770M 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 Radeon HD 7770M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.