Quadro FX 4800 vs Radeon R9 390

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 390 with Quadro FX 4800, including specs and performance data.

R9 390
2015
0 MB GDDR5, 275 Watt
23.10
+809%

R9 390 outperforms FX 4800 by a whopping 809% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking240825
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation11.650.04
Power efficiency5.861.18
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGrenadaGT200B
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date18 June 2015 (9 years ago)11 November 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$329 $1,799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 390 has 29025% 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 cores2560192
Core clock speedno data602 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,200 million1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate160.038.53
Floating-point processing power5.12 TFLOPS0.4623 TFLOPS
ROPs6424
TMUs16064

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length275 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pin1x 6-pin
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount0 MB1536 MB
Memory bus width512 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth384 GB/s76.8 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1211.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.34.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan+N/A
Mantle+-
CUDA-1.3

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.

R9 390 23.10
+809%
FX 4800 2.54

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.

R9 390 8910
+811%
FX 4800 978

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 23.10 2.54
Recency 18 June 2015 11 November 2008
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 150 Watt

R9 390 has a 809.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.

FX 4800, on the other hand, has 83.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 390 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 4800 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 390 is a desktop card while Quadro FX 4800 is a workstation 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.


AMD Radeon R9 390
Radeon R9 390
NVIDIA Quadro FX 4800
Quadro FX 4800

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.


4.2 565 votes

Rate Radeon R9 390 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 62 votes

Rate Quadro FX 4800 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.