NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M and NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800M 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 NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M

  • Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 6 month(s) later
  • Around 20% higher core clock speed: 672 MHz vs 561 MHz
  • Around 33% higher pipelines: 96 vs 72
  • Around 59% better floating-point performance: 258.05 gflops vs 162 gflops
  • Around 29% lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 45 Watt
  • Around 2% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 478 vs 467
  • Around 26% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 88 vs 70
  • 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2210 vs 926
  • Around 86% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2701 vs 1450
  • 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2210 vs 926
  • Around 86% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2701 vs 1450
Specifications (specs)
Launch date 5 January 2011 vs 15 June 2009
Core clock speed 672 MHz vs 561 MHz
Pipelines 96 vs 72
Floating-point performance 258.05 gflops vs 162 gflops
Thermal Design Power (TDP) 35 Watt vs 45 Watt
Benchmarks
PassMark - G3D Mark 478 vs 467
PassMark - G2D Mark 88 vs 70
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) 2210 vs 926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) 2701 vs 1450
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) 2210 vs 926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) 2701 vs 1450

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800M

  • Around 25% higher texture fill rate: 13.46 GTexel / s vs 10.8 billion / sec
  • 2.4x more memory clock speed: 2200 MHz vs 900 MHz
  • 3.3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 7043 vs 2149
Specifications (specs)
Texture fill rate 13.46 GTexel / s vs 10.8 billion / sec
Memory clock speed 2200 MHz vs 900 MHz
Benchmarks
Geekbench - OpenCL 7043 vs 2149

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800M

PassMark - G3D Mark
GPU 1
GPU 2
478
467
PassMark - G2D Mark
GPU 1
GPU 2
88
70
Geekbench - OpenCL
GPU 1
GPU 2
2149
7043
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)
GPU 1
GPU 2
2210
926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)
GPU 1
GPU 2
2701
1450
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)
GPU 1
GPU 2
2210
926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)
GPU 1
GPU 2
2701
1450
Name NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800M
PassMark - G3D Mark 478 467
PassMark - G2D Mark 88 70
Geekbench - OpenCL 2149 7043
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) 4.85
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 195.796
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) 0.561
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) 9.109
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 16.727
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) 960
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) 2210 926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) 2701 1450
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) 960
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) 2210 926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) 2701 1450
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score 0

Compare specifications (specs)

NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800M

Essentials

Architecture Fermi Tesla 2.0
Code name GF108 GT215
Launch date 5 January 2011 15 June 2009
Place in performance rating 1507 1510
Type Laptop Mobile workstation

Technical info

Core clock speed 672 MHz 561 MHz
CUDA cores 96
Floating-point performance 258.05 gflops 162 gflops
Manufacturing process technology 40 nm 40 nm
Pipelines 96 72
Texture fill rate 10.8 billion / sec 13.46 GTexel / s
Thermal Design Power (TDP) 35 Watt 45 Watt
Transistor count 585 million 727 million

Video outputs and ports

Display Connectors No outputs No outputs

Compatibility, dimensions and requirements

Interface MXM-A (3.0) MXM-A (3.0)
Laptop size large medium sized

API support

DirectX 12 API 10.1
OpenCL 1.1
OpenGL 4.5 3.3

Memory

Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 1 GB
Memory bandwidth 28.8 GB / s 35.2 GB / s
Memory bus width 128 Bit 128 Bit
Memory clock speed 900 MHz 2200 MHz
Memory type DDR3 DDR3, GDDR5
Shared memory 0 0

Technologies

3D Blu-Ray
3D Gaming
3D Vision
3D Vision / 3DTV Play
CUDA
DirectCompute
DirectX 11 DirectX 11
Optimus