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
- Around 99% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 801 vs 402
- 5.1x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 291 vs 57
| 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 | 801 vs 402 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 291 vs 57 |
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 | 801 | 402 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 291 | 57 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 693 | |
| 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 | 1427 | 1429 |
| 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) | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare ATI Radeon HD 5670 with others
ATIRadeon HD 5670 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9600 GSO
ATIRadeon HD 5670 vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 1800
ATIRadeon HD 5670 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 230
ATIRadeon HD 5670 vs
AMDRadeon HD 6570
ATIRadeon HD 5670 vs
AMDRadeon HD 6520G
ATIRadeon HD 5670 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 555M
