NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 vs NVIDIA GeForce 9650M GT
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 and NVIDIA GeForce 9650M GT 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, GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 380
- Videocard is newer: launch date 7 month(s) later
- Around 26% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 173 vs 137
- Around 16% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 66 vs 57
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 30 March 2009 vs 19 August 2008 |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 173 vs 137 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 66 vs 57 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 9650M GT
- Around 22% higher core clock speed: 550 MHz vs 450 MHz
- 2.4x more texture fill rate: 8.8 GTexel / s vs 3.6 GTexel / s
- 2x more pipelines: 32 vs 16
- 2.4x better floating-point performance: 84.8 gflops vs 35.2 gflops
- Around 48% lower typical power consumption: 23 Watt vs 34 Watt
- Around 14% higher memory clock speed: 1600 MHz vs 1400 MHz
- Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1465 vs 1230
- Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1465 vs 1230
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz vs 450 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 8.8 GTexel / s vs 3.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 32 vs 16 |
| Floating-point performance | 84.8 gflops vs 35.2 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 23 Watt vs 34 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz vs 1400 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1465 vs 1230 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1465 vs 1230 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro FX 380
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 9650M GT
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 | NVIDIA GeForce 9650M GT |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 173 | 137 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 66 | 57 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1230 | 1465 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1230 | 1465 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 | NVIDIA GeForce 9650M GT | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Tesla | Tesla |
| Code name | G96 | G96 |
| Launch date | 30 March 2009 | 19 August 2008 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $129 | |
| Place in performance rating | 1572 | 1573 |
| Price now | $72.50 | |
| Type | Workstation | Laptop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 2.68 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 450 MHz | 550 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 35.2 gflops | 84.8 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Pipelines | 16 | 32 |
| Texture fill rate | 3.6 GTexel / s | 8.8 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 34 Watt | 23 Watt |
| Transistor count | 314 million | 314 million |
| CUDA cores | 32 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI | No outputs |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 1920x1200 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-II |
| Length | 198 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 10.0 | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 256 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 22.4 GB / s | 25.6 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1400 MHz | 1600 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR3 | GDDR2, GDDR3 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| PCI-E 2.0 | ||
