Quadro FX 1800M vs FirePro W4170M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W4170M and Quadro FX 1800M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

W4170M
2015
2 GB GDDR5
2.69
+122%

W4170M outperforms FX 1800M by a whopping 122% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8031048
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data1.86
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameOpalGT215
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date23 April 2015 (9 years ago)15 June 2009 (15 years ago)

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 cores38472
Core clock speed825 MHz561 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHzno data
Number of transistors950 million727 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data45 Watt
Texture fill rate21.6013.46
Floating-point processing power0.6912 TFLOPS0.162 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs2424

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 sizedmedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8MXM-A (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz550 MHz
Memory bandwidth64 GB/s35.2 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.5 (5.1)4.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.1 (1.2)1.1
Vulkan1.2.170N/A
CUDA-+

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.

W4170M 2.69
+122%
FX 1800M 1.21

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

W4170M 1037
+123%
FX 1800M 466

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
+133%
9−10
−133%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+18.8%
30−35
−18.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+18.8%
30−35
−18.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+18.8%
30−35
−18.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

This is how W4170M and FX 1800M compete in popular games:

  • W4170M is 133% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the W4170M is 550% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • W4170M is ahead in 45 tests (96%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.69 1.21
Recency 23 April 2015 15 June 2009
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm

W4170M has a 122.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The FirePro W4170M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 1800M 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.


AMD FirePro W4170M
FirePro W4170M
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800M
Quadro FX 1800M

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.


3.5 24 votes

Rate FirePro W4170M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 6 votes

Rate Quadro FX 1800M 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.