Radeon R5 240 OEM vs Quadro FX 1800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking1062not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.05no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameG94Oland
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date30 March 2009 (15 years ago)1 November 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$489 no data
Current price$132 (0.3x MSRP)$240

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores64384
Core clock speed550 MHz730 MHz
Boost clock speedno data780 MHz
Number of transistors505 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)59 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate17.6018.72
Floating-point performance176 gflops499.2 gflops

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 3.0 x8
Length198 mm168 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 typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount768 MB2 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1600 MHz1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth38.4 GB/s14.4 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 DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMIno data+

API compatibility

List of supported graphics 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
CUDA1.1no data

Pros & cons summary


Recency 30 March 2009 1 November 2013
Maximum RAM amount 768 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 59 Watt 50 Watt

We couldn't decide between Quadro FX 1800 and Radeon R5 240 OEM. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro FX 1800 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R5 240 OEM 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
AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM
Radeon R5 240 OEM

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.


3.5 116 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 496 votes

Rate Radeon R5 240 OEM 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.