UHD Graphics vs Quadro FX 2800M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 2800M with UHD Graphics, including specs and performance data.

FX 2800M
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 75 Watt
1.08

UHD Graphics outperforms FX 2800M by a whopping 417% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1082601
Place by popularitynot in top-1007
Power efficiency1.0038.62
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Generation 11.0 (2019−2021)
GPU code nameG92Jasper Lake GT1
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date1 December 2009 (14 years ago)11 January 2021 (3 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 cores96256
Core clock speed600 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data750 MHz
Number of transistors754 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm10 nm+
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate28.8012.00
Floating-point processing power0.288 TFLOPS0.384 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs4816

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)Ring Bus
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth64 GB/sno data
Shared memory-no 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.2
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.

FX 2800M 1.08
UHD Graphics 5.58
+417%

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 2800M 417
UHD Graphics 2151
+416%

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 HD31
−416%
160−170
+416%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−400%
65−70
+400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−400%
35−40
+400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−400%
160−170
+400%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−400%
65−70
+400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−400%
35−40
+400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−400%
55−60
+400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−400%
160−170
+400%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−400%
65−70
+400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−400%
35−40
+400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−400%
55−60
+400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−400%
160−170
+400%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Hitman 3 7−8
−400%
35−40
+400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 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 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%

This is how FX 2800M and UHD Graphics compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics is 416% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.08 5.58
Recency 1 December 2009 11 January 2021
Chip lithography 65 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 10 Watt

UHD Graphics has a 416.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 550% more advanced lithography process, and 650% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2800M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 2800M is a mobile workstation card while UHD Graphics is a desktop one.


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.


NVIDIA Quadro FX 2800M
Quadro FX 2800M
Intel UHD Graphics
UHD Graphics

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 6 votes

Rate Quadro FX 2800M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 6031 vote

Rate UHD Graphics 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.