ATI Radeon HD 5670 vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800
Comparative analysis of ATI Radeon HD 5670 and NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the ATI Radeon HD 5670
- Videocard is newer: launch date 9 month(s) later
- Around 41% higher core clock speed: 775 MHz vs 550 MHz
- 6.3x more pipelines: 400 vs 64
- 3.5x better floating-point performance: 620.0 gflops vs 176 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 40 nm vs 65 nm
- Around 33% higher maximum memory size: 1 GB vs 768 MB
- 2.5x more memory clock speed: 4000 MHz vs 1600 MHz
- 2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 803 vs 398
- 4.7x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 288 vs 61
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 14 January 2010 vs 30 March 2009 |
Core clock speed | 775 MHz vs 550 MHz |
Pipelines | 400 vs 64 |
Floating-point performance | 620.0 gflops vs 176 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm vs 65 nm |
Maximum memory size | 1 GB vs 768 MB |
Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz vs 1600 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 803 vs 398 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 288 vs 61 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800
- Around 14% higher texture fill rate: 17.6 GTexel / s vs 15.5 GTexel / s
- Around 8% lower typical power consumption: 59 Watt vs 64 Watt
- Around 38% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2917 vs 2113
- Around 38% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2917 vs 2113
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 17.6 GTexel / s vs 15.5 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 59 Watt vs 64 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2917 vs 2113 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2917 vs 2113 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: ATI Radeon HD 5670
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | ATI Radeon HD 5670 | NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 803 | 398 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 288 | 61 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 610 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 3.914 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 184.557 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.319 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.627 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 27.325 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1462 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1129 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2113 | 2917 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1462 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1129 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2113 | 2917 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
ATI Radeon HD 5670 | NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Tesla |
Code name | Redwood | G94 |
Design | ATI Radeon HD 5000 Series | |
Launch date | 14 January 2010 | 30 March 2009 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $119 | $489 |
Place in performance rating | 1420 | 1422 |
Type | Desktop | Workstation |
Price now | $186.29 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 4.05 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 775 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 775 MHz | 550 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 620.0 gflops | 176 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 65 nm |
Pipelines | 400 | 64 |
Stream Processors | 400 | |
Texture fill rate | 15.5 GTexel / s | 17.6 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 64 Watt | 59 Watt |
Transistor count | 627 million | 505 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | 168 mm | 198 mm |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
API support |
||
DirectX | 11 | 10.0 |
OpenGL | 4.4 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 768 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 64 GB/s | 38.4 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz | 1600 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
DualGraphics | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) |