NVIDIA Quadro FX 4800 vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro FX 4800 and NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700M 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, GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 4800
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 month(s) later
- 3.9x more texture fill rate: 38.5 GTexel / s vs 10 GTexel / s
- 6x more pipelines: 192 vs 32
- 4.7x better floating-point performance: 462.3 gflops vs 99.2 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 55 nm vs 65 nm
- 3x more maximum memory size: 1536 MB vs 512 MB
- 5.7x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 981 vs 173
- Around 44% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 2337
- Around 44% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 2337
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 11 November 2008 vs 1 October 2008 |
Texture fill rate | 38.5 GTexel / s vs 10 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 192 vs 32 |
Floating-point performance | 462.3 gflops vs 99.2 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm vs 65 nm |
Maximum memory size | 1536 MB vs 512 MB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 981 vs 173 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 2337 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 2337 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700M
- Around 4% higher core clock speed: 625 MHz vs 602 MHz
- 3x lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 150 Watt
- 2x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 135 vs 66
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 625 MHz vs 602 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt vs 150 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 135 vs 66 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro FX 4800
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA Quadro FX 4800 | NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 981 | 173 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 66 | 135 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 15302 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 2337 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 2337 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA Quadro FX 4800 | NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Tesla |
Code name | GT200B | G96 |
Launch date | 11 November 2008 | 1 October 2008 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $1,799 | |
Place in performance rating | 1301 | 1302 |
Price now | $149.99 | |
Type | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
Value for money (0-100) | 8.67 | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 602 MHz | 625 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 462.3 gflops | 99.2 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 65 nm |
Pipelines | 192 | 32 |
Texture fill rate | 38.5 GTexel / s | 10 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 150 Watt | 50 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,400 million | 314 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video | No outputs |
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-II |
Length | 267 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 10.0 | 10.0 |
OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 1536 MB | 512 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB / s | 25.6 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | 1600 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR3 | GDDR3 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
PowerMizer 8.0 | ||
PureVideo HD |