AMD Radeon HD 7570 vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 2800M
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon HD 7570 and NVIDIA Quadro FX 2800M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 7570
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- Around 8% higher core clock speed: 650 MHz vs 600 MHz
- 5x more pipelines: 480 vs 96
- 2.2x better floating-point performance: 624 gflops vs 288 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 40 nm vs 65 nm
- Around 25% lower typical power consumption: 60 Watt vs 75 Watt
- 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
- Around 47% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 611 vs 415
- 6x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 257 vs 43
- Around 39% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2724 vs 1963
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 vs 3259
- Around 39% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2724 vs 1963
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 vs 3259
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 5 January 2012 vs 1 December 2009 |
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz vs 600 MHz |
| Pipelines | 480 vs 96 |
| Floating-point performance | 624 gflops vs 288 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm vs 65 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt vs 75 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 1 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 611 vs 415 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 257 vs 43 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2724 vs 1963 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 vs 3259 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2724 vs 1963 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 vs 3259 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 2800M
- Around 85% higher texture fill rate: 28.8 GTexel / s vs 15.6 GTexel / s
- Around 25% higher memory clock speed: 2000 MHz vs 1600 MHz
| Texture fill rate | 28.8 GTexel / s vs 15.6 GTexel / s |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz vs 1600 MHz |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon HD 7570
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 2800M
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon HD 7570 | NVIDIA Quadro FX 2800M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 611 | 415 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 257 | 43 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 1548 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 4.874 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 259.769 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.487 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 14.033 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 57.396 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1389 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2724 | 1963 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3259 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1389 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2724 | 1963 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3259 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon HD 7570 | NVIDIA Quadro FX 2800M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Tesla |
| Code name | Turks | G92 |
| Launch date | 5 January 2012 | 1 December 2009 |
| Place in performance rating | 1260 | 1262 |
| Type | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
| Price now | $49.95 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 22.55 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 624 gflops | 288 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 65 nm |
| Pipelines | 480 | 96 |
| Texture fill rate | 15.6 GTexel / s | 28.8 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Transistor count | 716 million | 754 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
| Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 64 GB / s | 64.0 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory type | DDR3, GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| PowerMizer 8.0 | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon HD 7570 with others
AMDRadeon HD 7570 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 280M
AMDRadeon HD 7570 vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 2800M
AMDRadeon HD 7570 vs
AMDRadeon HD 6670
AMDRadeon HD 7570 vs
AMDRadeon HD 7620G IGP
AMDRadeon HD 7570 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K2000M
AMDRadeon HD 7570 vs
NVIDIAGRID K180Q
