ATI FirePro M5800 vs Radeon R9 270X
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R9 270X with FirePro M5800, including specs and performance data.
R9 270X outperforms M5800 by a whopping 803% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 446 | 1066 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 5.11 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 4.97 | 3.81 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | Curacao | Madison |
| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
| Design | reference | no data |
| Release date | 8 October 2013 (12 years ago) | 1 March 2010 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 cores | 1280 | 400 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 650 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,800 million | 627 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 26 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 84.00 | 13.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.688 TFLOPS | 0.52 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 8 |
| TMUs | 80 | 20 |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 40 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 256 KB |
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 size | no data | medium sized |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2 x 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 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 179.2 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| Eyefinity | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| DisplayPort support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| AppAcceleration | + | - |
| CrossFire | + | - |
| FreeSync | + | - |
| HD3D | + | - |
| LiquidVR | + | - |
| TressFX | + | - |
| TrueAudio | + | - |
| UVD | + | - |
| DDMA audio | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | + | N/A |
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 | 180−190
+757%
| 21
−757%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 1.11 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 65−70
+829%
|
7−8
−829%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
+700%
|
3−4
−700%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
+250%
|
6−7
−250%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+5100%
|
1−2
−5100%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 65−70
+829%
|
7−8
−829%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
+700%
|
3−4
−700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+1200%
|
3−4
−1200%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
+1625%
|
4−5
−1625%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+525%
|
8−9
−525%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+1700%
|
2−3
−1700%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
+250%
|
6−7
−250%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+378%
|
9−10
−378%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+212%
|
30−35
−212%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+5100%
|
1−2
−5100%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 65−70
+829%
|
7−8
−829%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 170−180
+467%
|
30−33
−467%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
+700%
|
3−4
−700%
|
| Dota 2 | 80−85
+371%
|
16−18
−371%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+1200%
|
3−4
−1200%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
+1625%
|
4−5
−1625%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+525%
|
8−9
−525%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+1700%
|
2−3
−1700%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 40−45
+4300%
|
1−2
−4300%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
+250%
|
6−7
−250%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
+1100%
|
2−3
−1100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+378%
|
9−10
−378%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−35
+343%
|
7−8
−343%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+212%
|
30−35
−212%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+5100%
|
1−2
−5100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
+700%
|
3−4
−700%
|
| Dota 2 | 80−85
+371%
|
16−18
−371%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+1200%
|
3−4
−1200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+525%
|
8−9
−525%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
+250%
|
6−7
−250%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+378%
|
9−10
−378%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−35
+343%
|
7−8
−343%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+212%
|
30−35
−212%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 65−70
+1625%
|
4−5
−1625%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+450%
|
4−5
−450%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 85−90
+1013%
|
8−9
−1013%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 80−85
+546%
|
12−14
−546%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
+2440%
|
5−6
−2440%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+967%
|
3−4
−967%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+2400%
|
1−2
−2400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+833%
|
3−4
−833%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 12−14
+1200%
|
1−2
−1200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 24−27
+1200%
|
2−3
−1200%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+64.3%
|
14−16
−64.3%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+800%
|
7−8
−800%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 16−18
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 40−45
+4200%
|
1−2
−4200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+1100%
|
1−2
−1100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 20−22
+900%
|
2−3
−900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
This is how R9 270X and ATI M5800 compete in popular games:
- R9 270X is 757% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R9 270X is 5100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, R9 270X surpassed ATI M5800 in all 49 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 11.65 | 1.29 |
| Recency | 8 October 2013 | 1 March 2010 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 26 Watt |
R9 270X has a 803.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
ATI M5800, on the other hand, has 592.3% lower power consumption.
The Radeon R9 270X is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M5800 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R9 270X is a desktop graphics card while FirePro M5800 is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
