GeForce RTX 5090 vs Quadro FX 1800M

Place in the ranking	1057	1
Place by popularity	not in top-100	59
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	11.28
Power efficiency	1.86	9.98
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Blackwell 2.0 (2025)
GPU code name	GT215	GB202
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	15 June 2009 (15 years ago)	30 January 2025 (recently)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$1,999

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 cores	72	21760
Core clock speed	561 MHz	2017 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2407 MHz
Number of transistors	727 million	92,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	575 Watt
Texture fill rate	13.46	1,637
Floating-point processing power	0.162 TFLOPS	104.8 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	176
TMUs	24	680
Tensor Cores	no data	680
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	170

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 size	medium sized	no data
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 5.0 x16
Length	no data	304 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 16-pin

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR7
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	32 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	512 Bit
Memory clock speed	550 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	35.2 GB/s	1.79 TB/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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.1	6.8
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.4
CUDA	+	10.1

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.

FX 1800M 1.16

RTX 5090 100.00
+8521%

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 1800M 466

RTX 5090 40367
+8562%

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	2−3 −10250%	207 +10250%
1440p	2−3 −9100%	184 +9100%
4K	1−2 −14000%	141 +14000%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	9.66
1440p	no data	10.86
4K	no data	14.18

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −2657%	190−200 +2657%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −7400%	300−310 +7400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −11600%	110−120 +11600%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −2657%	190−200 +2657%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −7400%	300−310 +7400%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −8025%	650−700 +8025%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −2500%	150−160 +2500%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −11600%	110−120 +11600%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −2657%	190−200 +2657%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −7400%	300−310 +7400%
Dota 2	1−2 −17300%	170−180 +17300%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −1490%	159 +1490%
Fortnite	5−6 −6060%	300−350 +6060%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −8025%	650−700 +8025%
Grand Theft Auto V	1−2 −8400%	85−90 +8400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 −1436%	210−220 +1436%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −2500%	150−160 +2500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −2386%	170−180 +2386%
World of Tanks	27−30 −933%	270−280 +933%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −11600%	110−120 +11600%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −2786%	202 +2786%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −7400%	300−310 +7400%
Dota 2	1−2 −8400%	85−90 +8400%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −1450%	150−160 +1450%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 −8025%	650−700 +8025%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 −1436%	210−220 +1436%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 −8471%	600−650 +8471%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	90−95
World of Tanks	7−8 −7271%	500−550 +7271%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −8233%	250−260 +8233%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −3100%	160−170 +3100%
Forza Horizon 5	0−1	170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −7400%	300−310 +7400%
Valorant	6−7 −6800%	400−450 +6800%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −1640%	174 +1640%
Dota 2	14−16 −1113%	180−190 +1113%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −8233%	1250−1300 +8233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	3−4 −6867%	200−210 +6867%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	60−65
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −8233%	1250−1300 +8233%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −9000%	90−95 +9000%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −450%	55 +450%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −8400%	170−180 +8400%
Dota 2	14−16 −8233%	1250−1300 +8233%
Far Cry 5	0−1	100−110
Valorant	1−2 −24200%	240−250 +24200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Forza Horizon 5	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Valorant	500−550 +0%	500−550 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Forza Horizon 5	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Valorant	500−550 +0%	500−550 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 5	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Valorant	500−550 +0%	500−550 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	183 +0%	183 +0%
Dota 2	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Metro Exodus	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

4K
High Preset

Metro Exodus

167

+0%

167

+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Fortnite	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%

This is how FX 1800M and RTX 5090 compete in popular games:

RTX 5090 is 10250% faster in 1080p
RTX 5090 is 9100% faster in 1440p
RTX 5090 is 14000% faster in 4K

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

in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 5090 is 24200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RTX 5090 is ahead in 26 tests (63%)
there's a draw in 15 tests (37%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.16	100.00
Recency	15 June 2009	30 January 2025
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	32 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	575 Watt

FX 1800M has 1177.8% lower power consumption.

RTX 5090, on the other hand, has a 8520.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 5090 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 1800M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 1800M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce RTX 5090 is a desktop one.

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