T400 vs Quadro FX 3800

Aggregate performance score

FX 3800
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 108 Watt
2.06

T400 outperforms Quadro FX 3800 by a whopping 356% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking835439
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.2216.46
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code nameGT200BTU117
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date30 March 2009 (15 years ago)6 May 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 no data
Current price$171 (0.2x MSRP)$83

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

T400 has 7382% better value for money than FX 3800.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores192384
Core clock speed600 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1425 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)108 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate38.4034.20
Floating-point performance462.3 gflopsno data

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 x16
Length198 mmno data
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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1600 MHz10 GB/s
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s80 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 DisplayPort3x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.6
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA1.37.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FX 3800 2.06
T400 9.39
+356%

T400 outperforms Quadro FX 3800 by 356% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

FX 3800 797
T400 3630
+355%

T400 outperforms Quadro FX 3800 by 355% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.06 9.39
Recency 30 March 2009 6 May 2021
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 108 Watt 30 Watt

The T400 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 T400 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
NVIDIA T400
T400

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 48 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 366 votes

Rate T400 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.