NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 380
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX and NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 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 - 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 520MX
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- 2x more core clock speed: 900 MHz vs 450 MHz
- 2x more texture fill rate: 7.2 billion / sec vs 3.6 GTexel / s
- 3x more pipelines: 48 vs 16
- 4.9x better floating-point performance: 172.8 gflops vs 35.2 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 40 nm vs 65 nm
- Around 70% lower typical power consumption: 20 Watt vs 34 Watt
- 4x more maximum memory size: 1 GB vs 256 MB
- Around 65% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 285 vs 173
- Around 33% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1639 vs 1230
- Around 33% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1639 vs 1230
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 30 May 2011 vs 30 March 2009 |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz vs 450 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 7.2 billion / sec vs 3.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 48 vs 16 |
| Floating-point performance | 172.8 gflops vs 35.2 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm vs 65 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 20 Watt vs 34 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 1 GB vs 256 MB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 285 vs 173 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1639 vs 1230 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1639 vs 1230 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 380
- Around 56% higher memory clock speed: 1400 MHz vs 900 MHz
- Around 25% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 66 vs 53
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Memory clock speed | 1400 MHz vs 900 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 66 vs 53 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 380
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX | NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 285 | 173 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 53 | 66 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 1487 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 3.315 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 122.375 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 7.629 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 15.403 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 692 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1583 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1639 | 1230 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 692 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1583 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1639 | 1230 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX | NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Tesla |
| Code name | GF119 | G96 |
| Launch date | 30 May 2011 | 30 March 2009 |
| Place in performance rating | 1569 | 1572 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $129 | |
| Price now | $72.50 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 2.68 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 450 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 48 | |
| Floating-point performance | 172.8 gflops | 35.2 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 65 nm |
| Pipelines | 48 | 16 |
| Texture fill rate | 7.2 billion / sec | 3.6 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 20 Watt | 34 Watt |
| Transistor count | 292 million | 314 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 198 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 API | 10.0 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 256 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | 22.4 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 1400 MHz |
| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR3 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| DirectCompute | ||
| DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
| Optimus | ||
| Verde Drivers | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX with others
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520MX vs
NVIDIAGeForce Go 7900 GS
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520MX vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 3500
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520MX vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 380
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520MX vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 4100 IGP
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520MX vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 425M
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520MX vs
AMDROG Ally Extreme
