NVIDIA Tesla M60 vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Tesla M60 and NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. 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 Tesla M60
- Videocard is newer: launch date 6 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- 56x more texture fill rate: 2x 151.0 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 38.4 GTexel / s
- 21.3x more pipelines: 2x 2048 vs 192
- 20.9x better floating-point performance: 2x 4,833 gflops vs 462.3 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 55 nm
- 16x more maximum memory size: 2x 8 GB vs 1 GB
- 3.1x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 1600 MHz
- 9.3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 7652 vs 825
- 10.6x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 517 vs 49
- 2.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 29272 vs 13337
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 30 August 2015 vs 30 March 2009 |
| Texture fill rate | 2x 151.0 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 38.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2x 2048 vs 192 |
| Floating-point performance | 2x 4,833 gflops vs 462.3 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 55 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 2x 8 GB vs 1 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 1600 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7652 vs 825 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 517 vs 49 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 29272 vs 13337 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800
- Around 8% higher core clock speed: 600 MHz vs 557 MHz
- 2.8x lower typical power consumption: 108 Watt vs 300 Watt
- Around 82% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3258 vs 1791
- Around 82% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3258 vs 1791
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz vs 557 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 108 Watt vs 300 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3258 vs 1791 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3258 vs 1791 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Tesla M60
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Tesla M60 | NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7652 | 825 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 517 | 49 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 29272 | 13337 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 114.389 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1451.124 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.266 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 70.038 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 314.404 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8663 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 886 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1791 | 3258 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8663 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 886 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1791 | 3258 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Tesla M60 | NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | GM204 | GT200B |
| Launch date | 30 August 2015 | 30 March 2009 |
| Place in performance rating | 475 | 1363 |
| Type | Workstation | Workstation |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $799 | |
| Price now | $109.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 9.89 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1178 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 557 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 2x 4,833 gflops | 462.3 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Pipelines | 2x 2048 | 192 |
| Texture fill rate | 2x 151.0 GTexel / s billion / sec | 38.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 300 Watt | 108 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5,200 million | 1,400 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 198 mm |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2x 8 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 2x 160.4 GB / s | 51.2 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 2x 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 1600 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Tesla M60 with others
NVIDIATesla M60 vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 560
NVIDIATesla M60 vs
NVIDIAGRID M60-2Q
NVIDIATesla M60 vs
AMDRadeon E6465
NVIDIATesla M60 vs
AMDRadeon Pro WX 5100
NVIDIATesla M60 vs
NVIDIAQuadro M2200 Mobile
NVIDIATesla M60 vs
IntelUHD Graphics P750
