NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 5800
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M and NVIDIA Quadro FX 5800 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 GTX 460M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- 2.2x more core clock speed: 1350 MHz vs 610 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 40 nm vs 55 nm
- 3.8x lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 189 Watt
- Around 2% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1220 vs 1201
- 3.1x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 258 vs 83
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3349 vs 3319
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3349 vs 3319
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 3 September 2010 vs 11 November 2008 |
| Core clock speed | 1350 MHz vs 610 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm vs 55 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt vs 189 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1220 vs 1201 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 258 vs 83 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3349 vs 3319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3349 vs 3319 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 5800
- 3x more texture fill rate: 48.8 GTexel / s vs 16.1 billion / sec
- Around 25% higher pipelines: 240 vs 192
- Around 20% better floating-point performance: 622.1 gflops vs 518.4 gflops
- 2.7x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 1536 MB
- Around 28% higher memory clock speed: 1600 MHz vs 1250 MHz
- 4.3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 18229 vs 4263
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 48.8 GTexel / s vs 16.1 billion / sec |
| Pipelines | 240 vs 192 |
| Floating-point performance | 622.1 gflops vs 518.4 gflops |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 1536 MB |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz vs 1250 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 18229 vs 4263 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 5800
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M | NVIDIA Quadro FX 5800 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1220 | 1201 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 258 | 83 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 4263 | 18229 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 11.121 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 391.548 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.105 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 18.548 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 32.965 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1699 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2837 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3349 | 3319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1699 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2837 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3349 | 3319 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M | NVIDIA Quadro FX 5800 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Fermi | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | GF106 | GT200B |
| Launch date | 3 September 2010 | 11 November 2008 |
| Place in performance rating | 1234 | 1236 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,499 | |
| Price now | $178.89 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 8.02 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 1350 MHz | 610 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 518.4 gflops | 622.1 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Pipelines | 192 | 240 |
| Texture fill rate | 16.1 billion / sec | 48.8 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 189 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,170 million | 1,400 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Laptop size | large | |
| SLI options | 2-way | |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 API with Feature Level 12.1 | 10.0 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 1536 MB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 60.0 GB / s | 102.4 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 192 Bit | 512 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz | 1600 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DirectCompute | ||
| DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
| Optimus | ||
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 460M vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 4600
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 460M vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 5800
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 460M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 275
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 460M vs
AMDRadeon HD 6370M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 460M vs
NVIDIAGeForce 830M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 460M vs
AMDRadeon R9 M375
