Radeon HD 6470M vs Quadro FX 4800

Place in performance ranking	792	1169
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.10	no data
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Terascale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code name	GT200B	Seymour XT
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	11 November 2008 (15 years ago)	6 January 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,799	$569.99
Current price	$632 (0.4x MSRP)	$201 (0.4x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

FX 4800 and HD 6470M have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores	192	160
Core clock speed	602 MHz	700 / 750 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	370 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	38.53	5.600
Floating-point performance	462.3 gflops	224 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro FX 4800 and Radeon HD 6470M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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.

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no data

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 type	GDDR3	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	1536 MB	1 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1600 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	76.8 GB/s	12.8 GB/s
Shared memory	no 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 Connectors

1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model	4.0	5.0
OpenGL	3.3	4.4
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	1.3	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 4800 2.53
+329%

HD 6470M 0.59

Quadro FX 4800 outperforms Radeon HD 6470M by 329% 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 4800 978
+331%

HD 6470M 227

Quadro FX 4800 outperforms Radeon HD 6470M by 331% in Passmark.

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	40−45 +300%	10 −300%
Full HD	45−50 +309%	11 −309%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

12−14

+300%

3−4
−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Hitman 3	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +317%	12−14 −317%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 +329%	7−8 −329%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +289%	9−10 −289%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Hitman 3	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +317%	12−14 −317%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 +329%	7−8 −329%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +289%	9−10 −289%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +317%	12−14 −317%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 +329%	7−8 −329%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +289%	9−10 −289%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 +300%	4−5 −300%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Hitman 3	24−27 +300%	6−7 −300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%