ATI FirePro M5800 vs Quadro FX 3600M

Place in the ranking	1053	1001
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.19	3.82
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code name	G92	Madison
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	23 February 2008 (16 years ago)	1 March 2010 (14 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 cores	64	400
Core clock speed	500 MHz	650 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	627 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	70 Watt	26 Watt
Texture fill rate	16.00	13.00
Floating-point processing power	0.16 TFLOPS	0.52 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	8
TMUs	32	20

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 size	large	medium sized
Interface	MXM-HE	PCIe 2.0 x16

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 type	GDDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	799 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	51.14 GB/s	51.2 GB/s
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 Connectors

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model	4.0	5.0
OpenGL	3.3	4.4
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	1.1	-

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 HD

16−18

−31.3%

21
+31.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Elden Ring	0−1	1−2

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Dota 2	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Elden Ring	0−1	1−2
Far Cry 5	10−11 −10%	10−12 +10%
Fortnite	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 −7.1%	14−16 +7.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
World of Tanks	27−30 −11.1%	30−33 +11.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Dota 2	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −10%	10−12 +10%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 −7.1%	14−16 +7.1%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
World of Tanks	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Valorant	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%
Far Cry 5	0−1	1−2
Valorant	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Metro Exodus

0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Metro Exodus

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring

0−1

4K
High Preset

Elden Ring

0−1

This is how FX 3600M and ATI M5800 compete in popular games:

ATI M5800 is 31% faster in 1080p

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

in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the ATI M5800 is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

ATI M5800 is ahead in 28 tests (68%)
there's a draw in 13 tests (32%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.21	1.44
Recency	23 February 2008	1 March 2010
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	1 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	70 Watt	26 Watt

ATI M5800 has a 19% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 169.2% lower power consumption.

The FirePro M5800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3600M in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.