AMD Radeon R7 Graphics vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R7 Graphics and NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M 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: 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark.

AMD Radeon R7 Graphics

NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics

Videocard is newer: launch date 7 year(s) 9 month(s) later
3x more pipelines: 384 vs 128
Around 25% better floating-point performance: 526.8 gflops vs 422.4 gflops
A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 65 nm
6.7x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 100 Watt
Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3272

Specifications (specs)
Launch date	31 May 2016 vs 14 August 2008
Pipelines	384 vs 128
Floating-point performance	526.8 gflops vs 422.4 gflops
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm vs 65 nm
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	15 Watt vs 100 Watt
Benchmarks
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	3358 vs 3272

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M

3.4x more core clock speed: 675 MHz vs 200 MHz
2.6x more texture fill rate: 43.2 GTexel / s vs 16.46 GTexel / s
54.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3272 vs 60

Specifications (specs)
Core clock speed	675 MHz vs 200 MHz
Texture fill rate	43.2 GTexel / s vs 16.46 GTexel / s
Benchmarks
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	3272 vs 60

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3358

3272

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3272

Name	AMD Radeon R7 Graphics	NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
Geekbench - OpenCL	22612
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	15.145
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	206.354
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	1.2
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	24.15
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	85.46
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	1979
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	2101
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	3358	3272
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	33.5
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	33.9
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	60	3272
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	1457
PassMark - G3D Mark		575
PassMark - G2D Mark		42

Compare specifications (specs)

	AMD Radeon R7 Graphics	NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
Essentials
Architecture	GCN 3.0	Tesla
Code name	Wani	G92
Launch date	31 May 2016	14 August 2008
Place in performance rating	1433	1411
Type	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Technical info
Boost clock speed	758 MHz
Core clock speed	200 MHz	675 MHz
Floating-point performance	526.8 gflops	422.4 gflops
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	65 nm
Pipelines	384	128
Texture fill rate	16.46 GTexel / s	43.2 GTexel / s
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	15 Watt	100 Watt
Transistor count	2,410 million	754 million
Video outputs and ports
Display Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Interface	IGP	MXM-B (3.0)
Laptop size		large
API support
DirectX	12.0 (12_0)	10.0
OpenGL	4.5	3.3
Memory
Memory type	System Shared	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount		1 GB
Memory bandwidth		64.0 GB / s
Memory bus width		256 Bit
Memory clock speed		2000 MHz
Shared memory		0
Technologies
CUDA
PowerMizer 8.0