Radeon HD 6950M vs Quadro FX 3800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
CX FX 3800 FX 4800 FX 4800 Mac Edition FX 5800 Plex 2200 D2 Plex 2200 S4 Tesla C1060 Tesla C1080 Tesla S1070 Tesla S1075 Tesla T10 Processor
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
6950M 6970M 6970M Crossfire 6970M Mac Edition 6970M Rebrand 6970M X2 6990M 6990M Crossfire 6990M Rebrand

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3800 with Radeon HD 6950M, including specs and performance data.

FX 3800
2009, $799
1 GB GDDR3, 108 Watt
1.97

HD 6950M outperforms FX 3800 by an impressive 68% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
FX 3800 FX 3800
HD 6950M HD 6950M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking941792
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.04no data
Power efficiency1.405.10
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGT200BBlackcomb
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date30 March 2009 (17 years ago)4 January 2011 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 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 cores192960
Core clock speed600 MHz580 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million1,700 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)108 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate38.4027.84
Floating-point processing power0.4623 TFLOPS1.114 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs6448
L1 Cacheno data192 KB
L2 Cache128 KB512 KB

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 datalarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length198 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s115.2 GB/s
Shared memory--

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, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.0
OpenGL3.34.4
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.3-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 53 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 1.97 3.31
Recency 30 March 2009 4 January 2011
Chip lithography 55 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 108 Watt 50 Watt

HD 6950M has a 68% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 38% more advanced lithography process, and 116% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 6950M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3800 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3800 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 6950M is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

FX 3800 Quadro FX 3800
vs
FirePro W2100 FirePro W2100
HD 6950M Radeon HD 6950M
vs
Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5) Maxwell GPU Surface Book (940M, GDDR5)
FX 3800 Quadro FX 3800
vs
GRID K220Q GRID K220Q
FX 1800 Quadro FX 1800
vs
UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
FX 1800 Quadro FX 1800
vs
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile
FX 380 Quadro FX 380
vs
HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics
FX 380 Quadro FX 380
vs
Jetson T5000 Jetson T5000
FX 3800 Quadro FX 3800
vs
HD 8790M Radeon HD 8790M
FX 3800 Quadro FX 3800
vs
R5 310 OEM Radeon R5 310 OEM
FX 3800 Quadro FX 3800
vs
7500 LE GeForce 7500 LE
FX 3800 Quadro FX 3800
vs
GeForce4 Ti 4200-8X GeForce4 Ti 4200-8X
FX 3800 Quadro FX 3800
vs
MX450 12W GeForce MX450 12W
NVS 420 Quadro NVS 420
vs
GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.1 51 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Radeon HD 6950M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 3800 or Radeon HD 6950M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.