Radeon R5 340 OEM vs Quadro FX 3800

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking863not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.08no data
Power efficiency1.38no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGT200BOland
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date30 March 2009 (15 years ago)5 May 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores192384
Core clock speed600 MHz730 MHz
Boost clock speedno data780 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)108 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate38.4018.72
Floating-point processing power0.4623 TFLOPS0.599 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs6424

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 3.0 x8
Length198 mm145 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1150 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s36.8 GB/s

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 DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA1.3-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 30 March 2009 5 May 2015
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 108 Watt 65 Watt

R5 340 OEM has an age advantage of 6 years, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 66.2% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro FX 3800 and Radeon R5 340 OEM. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3800 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R5 340 OEM 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 3800
Quadro FX 3800
AMD Radeon R5 340 OEM
Radeon R5 340 OEM

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.


3.1 49 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 54 votes

Rate Radeon R5 340 OEM 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.