Arc A580 vs Quadro FX 380 LP

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 380 LP with Arc A580, including specs and performance data.

FX 380 LP
2009, $169
512 MB GDDR3, 28 Watt
0.34

A580 outperforms 380 LP by a whopping 8388% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1353219
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.9312.67
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGT218DG2-512
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date1 December 2009 (16 years ago)10 October 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$169 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 cores163072
Core clock speed550 MHz1700 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2000 MHz
Number of transistors260 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate4.400384.0
Floating-point processing power0.044 TFLOPS12.29 TFLOPS
ROPs496
TMUs8192
Tensor Coresno data384
Ray Tracing Coresno data24
L2 Cache32 KB8 MB

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 4.0 x16
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/s512.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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, 1x DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.6
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.2-
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

FX 380 LP 0.34
Arc A580 28.86
+8388%

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 380 LP 144
Samples: 59
Arc A580 12070
+8282%
Samples: 278

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 HD1−2
−10200%
103
+10200%
1440p0−156
4K-0−133

Cost per frame, $

1080p169.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 331
+0%
331
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 73
+0%
73
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 109
+0%
109
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 263
+0%
263
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 65
+0%
65
+0%
Far Cry 5 134
+0%
134
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 107
+0%
107
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 123
+0%
123
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 78
+0%
78
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 129
+0%
129
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 57
+0%
57
+0%
Far Cry 5 122
+0%
122
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 102
+0%
102
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 114
+0%
114
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 86
+0%
86
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 64
+0%
64
+0%
Metro Exodus 97
+0%
97
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 174
+0%
174
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 53
+0%
53
+0%
Far Cry 5 114
+0%
114
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 87
+0%
87
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 53
+0%
53
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 68
+0%
68
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 80
+0%
80
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 37
+0%
37
+0%
Metro Exodus 57
+0%
57
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 39
+0%
39
+0%
Far Cry 5 87
+0%
87
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75
+0%
75
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 39
+0%
39
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55
+0%
55
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 19
+0%
19
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 38
+0%
38
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 61
+0%
61
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21
+0%
21
+0%
Far Cry 5 47
+0%
47
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 56
+0%
56
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 22
+0%
22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

This is how FX 380 LP and Arc A580 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A580 is 10200% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.34 28.86
Recency 1 December 2009 10 October 2023
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 175 Watt

FX 380 LP has 525% lower power consumption.

Arc A580, on the other hand, has a 8388.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A580 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 380 LP in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 380 LP is a workstation graphics card while Arc A580 is a desktop 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 380 LP
Quadro FX 380 LP
Intel Arc A580
Arc A580

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.


3.1 7 votes

Rate Quadro FX 380 LP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 521 votes

Rate Arc A580 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 380 LP or Arc A580, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.