GeForce 8300 GS vs Quadro M520

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M520 with GeForce 8300 GS, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M520
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 25 Watt
4.85
+1517%

M520 outperforms 8300 GS by a whopping 1517% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6351325
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.520.52
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGM108G86
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date11 January 2017 (7 years ago)17 April 2007 (17 years ago)

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 cores3848
Core clock speed1041 MHz459 MHz
Boost clock speed1019 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data210 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate16.663.672
Floating-point processing power0.7995 TFLOPS0.01469 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs168

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR2
Maximum RAM amount2 GB128 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth40 GB/s6.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1211.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA5.01.1

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.

Quadro M520 4.85
+1517%
8300 GS 0.30

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.

Quadro M520 1872
+1528%
8300 GS 115

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 HD19
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
4K140−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6 0−1
Battlefield 5 12−14 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+3000%
1−2
−3000%
Hitman 3 10−12 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+3100%
1−2
−3100%
Metro Exodus 10−12 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+2200%
2−3
−2200%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6 0−1
Battlefield 5 12−14 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+3000%
1−2
−3000%
Hitman 3 10−12 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+3100%
1−2
−3100%
Metro Exodus 10−12 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 41
+1950%
2−3
−1950%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+2200%
2−3
−2200%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+3000%
1−2
−3000%
Hitman 3 10−12 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+3100%
1−2
−3100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+2200%
2−3
−2200%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 10−11 0−1
Hitman 3 9−10 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+3000%
1−2
−3000%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4 0−1
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6 0−1

This is how Quadro M520 and 8300 GS compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M520 is 1800% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.85 0.30
Recency 11 January 2017 17 April 2007
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 40 Watt

Quadro M520 has a 1516.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 60% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M520 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8300 GS in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M520 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce 8300 GS 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 M520
Quadro M520
NVIDIA GeForce 8300 GS
GeForce 8300 GS

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.


3.6 29 votes

Rate Quadro M520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.9 38 votes

Rate GeForce 8300 GS 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.