GeForce4 440 Go vs Quadro FX 4800

Place in the ranking	837	1529
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.06	no data
Power efficiency	1.17	no data
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Celsius (1999−2005)
GPU code name	GT200B	NV17 A5
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	11 November 2008 (16 years ago)	6 February 2002 (23 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,799	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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	192	2
Core clock speed	602 MHz	220 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	220 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	29 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	38.53	0.88
Floating-point processing power	0.4623 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	24	2
TMUs	64	4

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	AGP 4x
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no 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 type	GDDR3	DDR
Maximum RAM amount	1536 MB	64 MB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	220 MHz
Memory bandwidth	76.8 GB/s	7.04 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 Connectors

1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video

No outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	8.0
Shader Model	4.0	no data
OpenGL	3.3	1.3
OpenCL	1.1	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	1.3	-

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 4800 2.57
+25600%

GeForce4 440 Go 0.01

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 4800 988
+32833%

GeForce4 440 Go 3

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Valorant	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Valorant	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Valorant	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Valorant	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite

2−3

+0%

2−3

+0%

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 31 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.57	0.01
Recency	11 November 2008	6 February 2002
Maximum RAM amount	1536 MB	64 MB
Chip lithography	55 nm	150 nm

FX 4800 has a 25600% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 172.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro FX 4800 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce4 440 Go in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 4800 is a workstation card while GeForce4 440 Go is a notebook 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.

Quadro FX 4800

GeForce4 440 Go

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.

4 67 votes

Rate Quadro FX 4800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

3 2 votes

Rate GeForce4 440 Go on a scale of 1 to 5:

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 4800 or GeForce4 440 Go, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.