Quadro FX 2700M vs ATI FirePro M5800

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro M5800 and Quadro FX 2700M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI M5800
2010
1 GB GDDR5, 26 Watt
1.44
+51.6%

ATI M5800 outperforms FX 2700M by an impressive 52% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking9991120
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.02
Power efficiency3.801.00
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameMadisonG94
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date1 March 2010 (14 years ago)14 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$99.95

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores40048
Core clock speed650 MHz530 MHz
Number of transistors627 million505 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)26 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate13.0012.72
Floating-point processing power0.52 TFLOPS0.1272 TFLOPS
ROPs816
TMUs2024

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizemedium sizedlarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-HE

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz799 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s51.14 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.2 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.04.0
OpenGL4.43.3
OpenCL1.21.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA-1.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

ATI M5800 1.44
+51.6%
FX 2700M 0.95

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

ATI M5800 3760
+34.3%
FX 2700M 2799

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD21
+75%
12−14
−75%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data8.33

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+15.4%
12−14
−15.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+6.5%
30−35
−6.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+15.4%
12−14
−15.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+6.5%
30−35
−6.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+15.4%
12−14
−15.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+6.5%
30−35
−6.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

This is how ATI M5800 and FX 2700M compete in popular games:

  • ATI M5800 is 75% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the ATI M5800 is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • ATI M5800 is ahead in 34 tests (85%)
  • there's a draw in 6 tests (15%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.44 0.95
Recency 1 March 2010 14 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 26 Watt 65 Watt

ATI M5800 has a 51.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

The FirePro M5800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2700M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


ATI FirePro M5800
FirePro M5800
NVIDIA Quadro FX 2700M
Quadro FX 2700M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 9 votes

Rate FirePro M5800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 9 votes

Rate Quadro FX 2700M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.