NVIDIA Quadro 600 vs NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GS
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro 600 and NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GS 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 Quadro 600
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- Around 21% higher core clock speed: 640 MHz vs 530 MHz
- Around 50% higher pipelines: 96 vs 64
- Around 45% better floating-point performance: 245.76 gflops vs 169.6 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 40 nm vs 65 nm
- Around 50% lower typical power consumption: 40 Watt vs 60 Watt
- 2x more maximum memory size: 1 GB vs 512 MB
- 4.1x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 232 vs 57
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 13 December 2010 vs 1 November 2008 |
Core clock speed | 640 MHz vs 530 MHz |
Pipelines | 96 vs 64 |
Floating-point performance | 245.76 gflops vs 169.6 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm vs 65 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 40 Watt vs 60 Watt |
Maximum memory size | 1 GB vs 512 MB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 232 vs 57 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GS
- Around 56% higher texture fill rate: 16 billion / sec vs 10.24 GTexel / s
- Around 5% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 555 vs 531
- Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2414 vs 2037
- Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2414 vs 2037
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 16 billion / sec vs 10.24 GTexel / s |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 555 vs 531 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2414 vs 2037 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2414 vs 2037 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro 600
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GS
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA Quadro 600 | NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GS |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 531 | 555 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 232 | 57 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2117 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 5.617 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 185.752 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.526 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 9.023 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 16.137 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 899 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1255 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2037 | 2414 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 899 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1255 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2037 | 2414 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA Quadro 600 | NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GS | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Fermi | Tesla |
Code name | GF108 | G94 |
Launch date | 13 December 2010 | 1 November 2008 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $179 | |
Place in performance rating | 1467 | 1468 |
Price now | $299 | |
Type | Workstation | Laptop |
Value for money (0-100) | 2.80 | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 640 MHz | 530 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 245.76 gflops | 169.6 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 65 nm |
Pipelines | 96 | 64 |
Texture fill rate | 10.24 GTexel / s | 16 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 40 Watt | 60 Watt |
Transistor count | 585 million | 505 million |
CUDA cores | 64 | |
Gigaflops | 254 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | 168 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | |
Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 10.0 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB / s | 51.2 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | 1600 MHz |
Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR3 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
CUDA | ||
Power management | 8.0 |