ATI Radeon HD 4850 vs Quadro FX 4800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 4800 with Radeon HD 4850, including specs and performance data.

FX 4800
2008
1536 MB GDDR3, 150 Watt
2.56

ATI HD 4850 outperforms FX 4800 by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking828813
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.050.26
Power efficiency1.181.67
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGT200BRV770
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date11 November 2008 (16 years ago)25 June 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,799 $199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

ATI HD 4850 has 420% better value for money than FX 4800.

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 cores192800
Core clock speed602 MHz625 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million956 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt110 Watt
Texture fill rate38.5325.00
Floating-point processing power0.4623 TFLOPS1 TFLOPS
ROPs2416
TMUs6440

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 2.0 x16
Length267 mm246 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1x 6-pin

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 amount1536 MB512 MB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz993 MHz
Memory bandwidth76.8 GB/s63.55 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 DisplayPort, 1x S-Video2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.04.1
OpenGL3.33.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.3-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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 4800 2.56
ATI HD 4850 2.67
+4.3%

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 4800 986
ATI HD 4850 1026
+4.1%

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:

900p27−30
−7.4%
29
+7.4%
Full HD35−40
−11.4%
39
+11.4%
1200p18−20
−5.6%
19
+5.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p51.40
−907%
5.10
+907%
  • ATI HD 4850 has 907% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Elden Ring 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Elden Ring 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
World of Tanks 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
World of Tanks 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how FX 4800 and ATI HD 4850 compete in popular games:

  • ATI HD 4850 is 7% faster in 900p
  • ATI HD 4850 is 11% faster in 1080p
  • ATI HD 4850 is 6% faster in 1200p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 53 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.56 2.67
Recency 11 November 2008 25 June 2008
Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 512 MB
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 110 Watt

FX 4800 has an age advantage of 4 months, and a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.

ATI HD 4850, on the other hand, has a 4.3% higher aggregate performance score, and 36.4% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro FX 4800 and Radeon HD 4850.

Be aware that Quadro FX 4800 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 4850 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
ATI Radeon HD 4850
Radeon HD 4850

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.


4 67 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 267 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4850 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.