GeForce 940MX vs Quadro FX 3800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3800 with GeForce 940MX, including specs and performance data.

FX 3800
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 108 Watt
1.84

940MX outperforms FX 3800 by an impressive 84% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking882711
Place by popularitynot in top-10090
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.08no data
Power efficiency1.3511.64
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGT200BGM107
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date30 March 2009 (15 years ago)28 June 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores192512
Core clock speed600 MHz795 MHz
Boost clock speedno data861 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)108 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate38.4027.55
Floating-point processing power0.4623 TFLOPS0.8817 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs6432

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
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length198 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

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, GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s40.1 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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boostno data2.0
Optimus-+
GameWorks-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.34.5
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA1.3+

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.

FX 3800 1.84
GeForce 940MX 3.39
+84.2%

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 3800 822
GeForce 940MX 1515
+84.3%

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 HD9−10
−100%
18
+100%
4K5−6
−100%
10
+100%

Cost per frame, $

1080p88.78no data
4K159.80no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Battlefield 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Fortnite 44
+0%
44
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18
+0%
18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 15
+0%
15
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Battlefield 5 13
+0%
13
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 58
+0%
58
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 48
+0%
48
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Fortnite 13
+0%
13
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14
+0%
14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 13
+0%
13
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14
+0%
14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+0%
12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 11
+0%
11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 46
+0%
46
+0%
Far Cry 5 11
+0%
11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12
+0%
12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9
+0%
9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+0%
7
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10
+0%
10
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how FX 3800 and GeForce 940MX compete in popular games:

  • GeForce 940MX is 100% faster in 1080p
  • GeForce 940MX is 100% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 57 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.84 3.39
Recency 30 March 2009 28 June 2016
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 108 Watt 23 Watt

GeForce 940MX has a 84.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 369.6% lower power consumption.

The GeForce 940MX is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3800 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3800 is a workstation card while GeForce 940MX 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 3800
Quadro FX 3800
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
GeForce 940MX

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 50 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 2270 votes

Rate GeForce 940MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 3800 or GeForce 940MX, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.