Quadro P520 vs GeForce FX 5600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce FX 5600 with Quadro P520, including specs and performance data.

FX 5600
2003
128 MB DDR, 37 Watt
0.03

P520 outperforms FX 5600 by a whopping 18067% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1498623
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.0620.76
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameNV31GP108
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date6 March 2003 (21 year ago)23 May 2019 (5 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 coresno data384
Core clock speed325 MHz1303 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1493 MHz
Number of transistors80 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)37 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate1.30035.83
Floating-point processing powerno data1.147 TFLOPS
ROPs416
TMUs424

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 3.0 x16
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDRGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount128 MB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed250 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth8 GB/s48.06 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0a12 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGL1.5 (2.1)4.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA-6.1

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.

FX 5600 0.03
Quadro P520 5.45
+18067%

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.

FX 5600 12
Quadro P520 2094
+17350%

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 HD-0−121
4K-0−120

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 20
+0%
20
+0%
Fortnite 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 60
+0%
60
+0%
Far Cry 5 18
+0%
18
+0%
Fortnite 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 6
+0%
6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 54
+0%
54
+0%
Far Cry 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+0%
11
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 23
+0%
23
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.03 5.45
Recency 6 March 2003 23 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 128 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 37 Watt 18 Watt

Quadro P520 has a 18066.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 828.6% more advanced lithography process, and 105.6% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P520 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5600 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce FX 5600 is a desktop card while Quadro P520 is a mobile workstation one.

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.


NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600
GeForce FX 5600
NVIDIA Quadro P520
Quadro P520

Other comparisons

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.


3.2 71 vote

Rate GeForce FX 5600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 104 votes

Rate Quadro P520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce FX 5600 or Quadro P520, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.