Quadro FX 3800M vs UHD Graphics 620

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics 620 with Quadro FX 3800M, including specs and performance data.

UHD Graphics 620
2017
32 GB LPDDR3/DDR4, 15 Watt
2.67
+78%

UHD Graphics 620 outperforms FX 3800M by an impressive 78% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking808977
Place by popularity24not in top-100
Power efficiency12.381.04
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameKaby Lake GT2G92
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date1 September 2017 (7 years ago)14 August 2008 (16 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 cores192128
Core clock speed300 MHz675 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million754 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm++65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate24.0043.20
Floating-point processing power0.384 TFLOPS0.4224 TFLOPS
ROPs316
TMUs2464

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
InterfaceRing BusMXM-B (3.0)

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 typeLPDDR3/DDR4GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount32 GB1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data64 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL3.01.1
Vulkan1.3N/A
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.

UHD Graphics 620 2.67
+78%
FX 3800M 1.50

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.

UHD Graphics 620 1030
+77.6%
FX 3800M 580

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

UHD Graphics 620 7330
+8.1%
FX 3800M 6779

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 HD13
−162%
34
+162%
1440p15
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
4K7
+133%
3−4
−133%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6
+50%
4−5
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 8
+100%
4−5
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry New Dawn 10
+150%
4−5
−150%
Forza Horizon 4 38
+850%
4−5
−850%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40
+167%
14−16
−167%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 15
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30
−13.3%
30−35
+13.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 36
+800%
4−5
−800%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 34
+127%
14−16
−127%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+11.8%
30−35
−11.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5
−200%
14−16
+200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14
+75%
8−9
−75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3
−267%
10−12
+267%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+11.8%
30−35
−11.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

This is how UHD Graphics 620 and FX 3800M compete in popular games:

  • FX 3800M is 162% faster in 1080p
  • UHD Graphics 620 is 88% faster in 1440p
  • UHD Graphics 620 is 133% faster in 4K

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics 620 is 850% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the FX 3800M is 267% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 620 is ahead in 43 tests (88%)
  • FX 3800M is ahead in 3 tests (6%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (6%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.67 1.50
Recency 1 September 2017 14 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount 32 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 100 Watt

UHD Graphics 620 has a 78% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 566.7% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 620 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3800M in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics 620 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 3800M is a mobile workstation 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.


Intel UHD Graphics 620
UHD Graphics 620
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
Quadro FX 3800M

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 4392 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 6 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3800M 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.