HD Graphics 520 vs Quadro FX 3800M

Place in performance ranking	928	820
Place by popularity	not in top-100	36
Value for money	0.09	0.18
Architecture	G9x (2007−2010)	Gen. 9 Skylake (2015−2016)
GPU code name	N10E-GLM4	Skylake GT2
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	20 December 2009 (14 years ago)	1 September 2015 (8 years ago)
Current price	$199	$309

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

HD Graphics 520 has 100% better value for money than FX 3800M.

Technical specs

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 cores	128	24
Core clock speed	675 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1050 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	189 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	43.20	25.20
Floating-point performance	422.4 gflops	no data

Size and compatibility

Information on Quadro FX 3800M and HD Graphics 520 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x1

Memory

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 type	GDDR3	DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	32 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1000 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	64 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	-	+

Video outputs and ports

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 Connectors

No outputs

Technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API support

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	4.0	6.4
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.1
Vulkan	N/A	+
CUDA	+	no data

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 3800M 1.51

HD Graphics 520 2.15
+42.4%

HD Graphics 520 outperforms Quadro FX 3800M by 42% based on our aggregated 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 3800M 585

HD Graphics 520 831
+42.1%

HD Graphics 520 outperforms Quadro FX 3800M by 42% in Passmark.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

FX 3800M 6779
+18.5%

HD Graphics 520 5722

Quadro FX 3800M outperforms HD Graphics 520 by 18% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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:

900p	14−16 −42.9%	20 +42.9%
Full HD	34 +209%	11 −209%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

−25%

5−6
+25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	2−3
Battlefield 5	0−1	3−4
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 −10%	10−12 +10%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Hitman 3	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	2−3
Battlefield 5	0−1	3−4
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 −10%	10−12 +10%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Hitman 3	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +0%	4 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	2−3
Battlefield 5	0−1	3−4
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hitman 3	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	1−2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	1−2

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	1−2
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	1−2
Far Cry 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

This is how FX 3800M and HD Graphics 520 compete in popular games:

HD Graphics 520 is 42.9% faster than FX 3800M in 900p
FX 3800M is 209% faster than HD Graphics 520 in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD Graphics 520 is 300% faster than the FX 3800M.

All in all, in popular games:

HD Graphics 520 is ahead in 22 tests (69%)
there's a draw in 10 tests (31%)

Advantages and disadvantages

Performance score	1.51	2.15
Recency	20 December 2009	1 September 2015
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	32 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	15 Watt