Radeon RX 560X Mobile vs Quadro FX 4800

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 4800 with Radeon RX 560X Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FX 4800
2008
1536 MB GDDR3, 150 Watt
2.57

RX 560X Mobile outperforms FX 4800 by a whopping 321% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking829428
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.06no data
Power efficiency1.1811.49
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGT200BPolaris 21
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date11 November 2008 (16 years ago)11 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,799 no data

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 cores1921024
Core clock speed602 MHz1275 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1202 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate38.5381.60
Floating-point processing power0.4623 TFLOPS2.611 TFLOPS
ROPs2416
TMUs6464

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
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1450 MHz
Memory bandwidth76.8 GB/s92.8 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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA1.3-

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 HD8−9
−325%
34
+325%

Cost per frame, $

1080p224.88no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18
+0%
18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+0%
23
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 51
+0%
51
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Metro Exodus 39
+0%
39
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 47
+0%
47
+0%
Valorant 50
+0%
50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 44
+0%
44
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 15
+0%
15
+0%
Dota 2 47
+0%
47
+0%
Far Cry 5 28
+0%
28
+0%
Fortnite 50
+0%
50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 42
+0%
42
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 36
+0%
36
+0%
Metro Exodus 26
+0%
26
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 101
+0%
101
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
World of Tanks 122
+0%
122
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 31
+0%
31
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
+0%
7
+0%
Dota 2 66
+0%
66
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 37
+0%
37
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 29
+0%
29
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
World of Tanks 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

This is how FX 4800 and RX 560X Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RX 560X Mobile is 325% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.57 10.83
Recency 11 November 2008 11 April 2018
Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 65 Watt

RX 560X Mobile has a 321.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 292.9% more advanced lithography process, and 130.8% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 560X Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 4800 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 4800 is a workstation card while Radeon RX 560X Mobile is a notebook 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 4800
Quadro FX 4800
AMD Radeon RX 560X Mobile
Radeon RX 560X Mobile

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:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 417 votes

Rate Radeon RX 560X Mobile 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.