Radeon Graphics 512SP vs Quadro FX 4800

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking823not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.04no data
Power efficiency1.17no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGT200BRenoir
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date11 November 2008 (16 years ago)7 March 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,799 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 cores192512
Core clock speed602 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2100 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate38.5367.20
Floating-point processing power0.4623 TFLOPS2.15 TFLOPS
ROPs248
TMUs6432

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 x16IGP
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1536 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width384 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed800 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth76.8 GB/sno data

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 DisplayPort, 1x S-VideoMotherboard Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.7 (6.4)
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.3-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 11 November 2008 7 March 2020
Chip lithography 55 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 15 Watt

Graphics 512SP has an age advantage of 11 years, a 685.7% more advanced lithography process, and 900% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro FX 4800 and Radeon Graphics 512SP. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro FX 4800 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon Graphics 512SP 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 4800
Quadro FX 4800
AMD Radeon Graphics 512SP
Radeon Graphics 512SP

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.


4.2 62 votes

Rate Quadro FX 4800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2 77 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics 512SP 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.