GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile vs Quadro FX 5800
Aggregate performance score
GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile outperforms Quadro FX 5800 by a whopping 1133% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 714 | 105 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 74 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.62 | no data |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | Ada Lovelace |
| GPU code name | GT200B | GN21-X2 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 11 November 2008 (15 years ago) | 3 January 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,499 | no data |
| Current price | $157 (0x MSRP) | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 | 240 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 610 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2370 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,400 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 189 Watt | 115 Watt (35 - 115 Watt TGP) |
| Texture fill rate | 48.80 | 140.4 |
| Floating-point performance | 622.1 gflops | no data |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Quadro FX 5800 and GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile 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.
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | 512 Bit | 96 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | 16000 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 192.0 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 | 2x DVI, 1x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video | Portable Device Dependent |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| CUDA | 1.3 | 8.9 |
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 HD | 7−8
−1271%
| 96
+1271%
|
| 1440p | 4−5
−1150%
| 50
+1150%
|
| 4K | 2−3
−1500%
| 32
+1500%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.16 | 38.95 |
| Recency | 11 November 2008 | 3 January 2023 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 6 GB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 189 Watt | 115 Watt |
The GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 5800 in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro FX 5800 is a workstation card while GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
