GeForce GT 335M vs Quadro FX 4600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 4600 with GeForce GT 335M, including specs and performance data.

FX 4600
2007
768 MB GDDR3, 134 Watt
0.95
+9.2%

FX 4600 outperforms 335M by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11581183
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.552.41
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameG80GT215
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date5 March 2007 (18 years ago)7 January 2010 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,999 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 cores9672
Core clock speed500 MHz450 MHz
Number of transistors681 million727 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)134 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate24.0010.80
Floating-point processing power0.2304 TFLOPS0.1555 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data233
ROPs248
TMUs2424
L2 Cache96 KB64 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 datamedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data
SLI options-+

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 typeGDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount768 MB1 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHzUp to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth67.2 GB/s25.6 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoSingle Link DVIVGADisplayPortHDMIDual Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

Power managementno data8.0

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.04.1
OpenGL3.32.1
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmarks

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 4600 0.95
+9.2%
GT 335M 0.87

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 4600 403
+9.8%
Samples: 380
GT 335M 367
Samples: 325

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 HD16−18
+0%
16
+0%

Cost per frame, $

1080p124.94no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how FX 4600 and GT 335M compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 37 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.95 0.87
Recency 5 March 2007 7 January 2010
Maximum RAM amount 768 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 134 Watt 28 Watt

FX 4600 has a 9.2% higher aggregate performance score.

GT 335M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 125% more advanced lithography process, and 378.6% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro FX 4600 and GeForce GT 335M.

Be aware that Quadro FX 4600 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GT 335M 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 4600
Quadro FX 4600
NVIDIA GeForce GT 335M
GeForce GT 335M

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.


3.8 13 votes

Rate Quadro FX 4600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 27 votes

Rate GeForce GT 335M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 4600 or GeForce GT 335M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.