UHD Graphics 605 vs Quadro FX 2800M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 2800M with UHD Graphics 605, including specs and performance data.

FX 2800M
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 75 Watt
1.08

UHD Graphics 605 outperforms FX 2800M by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10791062
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.0016.20
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameG92Gemini Lake GT1.5
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date1 December 2009 (14 years ago)11 December 2017 (6 years ago)

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 cores96144
Core clock speed600 MHz200 MHz
Boost clock speedno data750 MHz
Number of transistors754 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt5 Watt
Texture fill rate28.8013.50
Floating-point processing power0.288 TFLOPS0.216 TFLOPS
ROPs163
TMUs4818

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)Ring Bus
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth64 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+-

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FX 2800M 1.08
UHD Graphics 605 1.17
+8.3%

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 2800M 417
UHD Graphics 605 453
+8.6%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

FX 2800M 5783
+167%
UHD Graphics 605 2162

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 HD31
+210%
10
−210%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 1−2
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 1−2
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 1−2
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+1000%
1
−1000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 1−2
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how FX 2800M and UHD Graphics 605 compete in popular games:

  • FX 2800M is 210% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the FX 2800M is 1000% faster.
  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics 605 is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • FX 2800M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • UHD Graphics 605 is ahead in 15 tests (35%)
  • there's a draw in 27 tests (63%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.08 1.17
Recency 1 December 2009 11 December 2017
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 5 Watt

UHD Graphics 605 has a 8.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 1400% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro FX 2800M and UHD Graphics 605.

Be aware that Quadro FX 2800M is a mobile workstation card while UHD Graphics 605 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 2800M
Quadro FX 2800M
Intel UHD Graphics 605
UHD Graphics 605

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 6 votes

Rate Quadro FX 2800M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 799 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 605 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.