NVIDIA GeForce GT 520 vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 LP
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 520 and NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 LP 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 NVIDIA GeForce GT 520
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 4 month(s) later
- 2.9x more core clock speed: 1620 MHz vs 550 MHz
- Around 48% higher texture fill rate: 6.5 billion / sec vs 4.4 GTexel / s
- 3x more pipelines: 48 vs 16
- 3.5x better floating-point performance: 155.52 gflops vs 44 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 1 GB (DDR3) vs 512 MB
- 2.5x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 312 vs 123
- Around 80% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 135 vs 75
- Around 42% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1455 vs 1023
- Around 42% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1455 vs 1023
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 13 April 2011 vs 1 December 2009 |
| Core clock speed | 1620 MHz vs 550 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 6.5 billion / sec vs 4.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 48 vs 16 |
| Floating-point performance | 155.52 gflops vs 44 gflops |
| Maximum memory size | 1 GB (DDR3) vs 512 MB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 312 vs 123 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 135 vs 75 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1455 vs 1023 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1455 vs 1023 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 LP
- Around 4% lower typical power consumption: 28 Watt vs 29 Watt
- Around 78% higher memory clock speed: 1600 MHz vs 900 MHz (DDR3)
- 2.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 2855 vs 1274
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 28 Watt vs 29 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz vs 900 MHz (DDR3) |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 2855 vs 1274 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 520
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 LP
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GT 520 | NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 LP |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 312 | 123 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 135 | 75 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 1274 | 2855 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 2.597 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 76.214 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.239 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 5.862 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 4.574 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 545 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 903 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1455 | 1023 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 545 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 903 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1455 | 1023 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GT 520 | NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 LP | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | GF119 | GT218 |
| Launch date | 13 April 2011 | 1 December 2009 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $59 | $169 |
| Place in performance rating | 1597 | 1599 |
| Price now | $59.99 | |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
| Value for money (0-100) | 7.58 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 1620 MHz | 550 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 48 | |
| Floating-point performance | 155.52 gflops | 44 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 102 °C | |
| Pipelines | 48 | 16 |
| Texture fill rate | 6.5 billion / sec | 4.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 29 Watt | 28 Watt |
| Transistor count | 292 million | 260 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA, Dual Link DVI-IHDMIVGA (optional) | 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | 16x PCI-E 2.0 | |
| Height | 2.7" (6.9 cm) | |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | 168 mm |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 10.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.2 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB (DDR3) | 512 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | 12.8 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz (DDR3) | 1600 MHz |
| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR3 |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GT 520 with others
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 230M
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520 vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 380 LP
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520 vs
IntelHD Graphics 3000
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 620 OEM
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8180
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520 vs
NVIDIAGRID K340
