Quadro FX 3800 vs Radeon RX Vega 64

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 64 with Quadro FX 3800, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 64
2017
8 GB HBM2, 295 Watt
37.18
+1705%

RX Vega 64 outperforms FX 3800 by a whopping 1705% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking116836
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation55.120.22
ArchitectureVega (2017−2021)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameVegaGT200B
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date14 August 2017 (6 years ago)30 March 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 $799
Current price$125 (0.3x MSRP)$171 (0.2x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX Vega 64 has 24955% better value for money than FX 3800.

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 cores4096192
Core clock speed1630 MHz600 MHz
Boost clock speed1546 MHzno data
Number of transistors12,500 million1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)295 Watt108 Watt
Texture fill rate395.838.40
Floating-point performance13,353 gflops462.3 gflops

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length279 mm198 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pin1x 6-pin

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 typeHBM2GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount8 GB1 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed945 MHz1600 MHz
Memory bandwidth483.8 GB/s51.2 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
HDMI+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.1.125N/A
CUDAno data1.3

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.

RX Vega 64 37.18
+1705%
FX 3800 2.06

Radeon RX Vega 64 outperforms Quadro FX 3800 by 1705% 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%

RX Vega 64 14358
+1702%
FX 3800 797

Radeon RX Vega 64 outperforms Quadro FX 3800 by 1702% 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:

Full HD116
+1833%
6−7
−1833%
1440p75
+1775%
4−5
−1775%
4K47
+2250%
2−3
−2250%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1150−1200
+1669%
65−70
−1669%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1450−1500
+1690%
81
−1690%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1450−1500
+1647%
83
−1647%
Battlefield 5 3350−3400
+1701%
186
−1701%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1200−1250
+1665%
68
−1665%
Cyberpunk 2077 1150−1200
+1669%
65−70
−1669%
Far Cry 5 2000−2050
+1686%
112
−1686%
Far Cry New Dawn 1900−1950
+1659%
108
−1659%
Forza Horizon 4 3000−3050
+1696%
167
−1696%
Hitman 3 1500−1550
+1686%
84
−1686%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3000−3050
+1696%
167
−1696%
Metro Exodus 2550−2600
+1671%
144
−1671%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2050−2100
+1667%
116
−1667%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3600−3650
+1682%
202
−1682%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1800−1850
+1700%
100
−1700%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1200−1250
+1665%
68
−1665%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1200−1250
+1639%
69
−1639%
Battlefield 5 3050−3100
+1694%
170
−1694%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1150−1200
+1669%
65
−1669%
Cyberpunk 2077 1150−1200
+1669%
65−70
−1669%
Far Cry 5 1550−1600
+1702%
86
−1702%
Far Cry New Dawn 1650−1700
+1674%
93
−1674%
Forza Horizon 4 5300−5350
+1703%
294
−1703%
Hitman 3 1350−1400
+1653%
77
−1653%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5250−5300
+1692%
293
−1692%
Metro Exodus 2050−2100
+1667%
116
−1667%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1850−1900
+1696%
103
−1696%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2950−3000
+1699%
164
−1699%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2350−2400
+1680%
132
−1680%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4450−4500
+1702%
247
−1702%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 900−950
+1665%
51
−1665%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1050−1100
+1650%
60
−1650%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 950−1000
+1659%
54
−1659%
Cyberpunk 2077 1150−1200
+1669%
65−70
−1669%
Far Cry 5 1200−1250
+1691%
67
−1691%
Forza Horizon 4 2300−2350
+1697%
128
−1697%
Horizon Zero Dawn 1800−1850
+1700%
100
−1700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2550−2600
+1683%
143
−1683%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1350−1400
+1653%
77
−1653%
Watch Dogs: Legion 950−1000
+1659%
54
−1659%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1600−1650
+1698%
89
−1698%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1250−1300
+1661%
70−75
−1661%
Far Cry New Dawn 1650−1700
+1674%
93
−1674%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 700−750
+1650%
40−45
−1650%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 800−850
+1602%
47
−1602%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1200−1250
+1639%
69
−1639%
Cyberpunk 2077 500−550
+1624%
27−30
−1624%
Far Cry 5 1450−1500
+1690%
81
−1690%
Forza Horizon 4 1750−1800
+1686%
98
−1686%
Hitman 3 900−950
+1700%
50
−1700%
Horizon Zero Dawn 1400−1450
+1650%
80
−1650%
Metro Exodus 1400−1450
+1672%
79
−1672%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1800−1850
+1700%
100
−1700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 950−1000
+1692%
50−55
−1692%
Watch Dogs: Legion 650−700
+1611%
38
−1611%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1100−1150
+1674%
62
−1674%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1050−1100
+1680%
59
−1680%
Far Cry New Dawn 600−650
+1567%
36
−1567%
Hitman 3 650−700
+1611%
38
−1611%
Horizon Zero Dawn 800−850
+1602%
45−50
−1602%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 550−600
+1619%
32
−1619%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 850−900
+1671%
48
−1671%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 500−550
+1624%
29
−1624%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 500−550
+1686%
28
−1686%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 450−500
+1700%
25
−1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 210−220
+1650%
12−14
−1650%
Far Cry 5 450−500
+1567%
27
−1567%
Forza Horizon 4 1150−1200
+1642%
66
−1642%
Horizon Zero Dawn 900−950
+1631%
52
−1631%
Metro Exodus 800−850
+1678%
45
−1678%
Watch Dogs: Legion 350−400
+1567%
21
−1567%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 550−600
+1674%
31
−1674%

This is how RX Vega 64 and FX 3800 compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega 64 is 1833% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega 64 is 1775% faster in 1440p
  • RX Vega 64 is 2250% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 37.18 2.06
Recency 14 August 2017 30 March 2009
Cost $499 $799
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 295 Watt 108 Watt

The Radeon RX Vega 64 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3800 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 64 is a desktop card while Quadro FX 3800 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 RX Vega 64
Radeon RX Vega 64
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800
Quadro FX 3800

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.


4.3 634 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 48 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3800 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.