, , , , , ,
zu verknüpfen.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

NVIDIA Quadro FX 2500M vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M

NVIDIA Quadro FX 2500M

► remove from comparison NVIDIA Quadro FX 2500M

Professionelle auf CAD optimierte Grafikkarte für Notebooks von NVidia basierend auf 7900 GTX. Wurde von der 3500M bzw 3600M abgelöst.

Durch spezielle professionelle Treiber zeigt sie eine sehr gute Anwendungsleistung (3D Renderer, CAD), jedoch eine schlechtere Spieleleistung. Mit gemoddeten Treibern sollte sie sich jedoch wie eine 7900 GTX verhalten.

Die Treiber der Quadro FX Serie sind zertifiziert für CAD Anwendungen (z.B. AutoCad, Inventor, Solidstation, Solid Edge, ...) und DCC Anwendungen (z.B. Maya, 3DS Max, Lightwave 3D, ...) und bieten eine 12-Bit-Präzision für Subpixel, Vollbild-Antialiasing, Hardwarebeschleunigtes Antialiasing für Punkte und Linien und weitere für CAD und DCC optimierte Einstellungen.

Links zu gemoddeten Treibern finden Sie hier.

NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M

► remove from comparison NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M

Die Nvidia Quadro FX 3800M ist eine mobile Grafikkarte für Workstation-Laptops. Sie basiert auf die selbe Architektur wie die GeForce GTX 280M und bietet die vollen 128 Shaderprozessoren des G92 Chips. Im Vergleich zum FX 3700M ist die FX 3800M höher getaktet und wird bereits in 55nm gefertigt.

Im Vergleich zu einer GTX 280M, sind die Taktraten nochmals deutlich höher. Daher weist die FX3800M auch einen höheren Stromverbrauch auf und eine bessere Performance. Die Spieleperformance ist jedoch, durch die auf professionelle 3D Anwendung spezialisierten Treiber, etwas geringer.

Die zertifizierten Treiber der Quadro FX Serie sorgen für eine optimierten Stabilität, Kompatibilität und Performance bei Professionellen Anwendungen (CAD-, DCC-, Medizin- und Prospektionsanwendungen). Besonders die OpenGL Performance soll bei den Quadro FX Karten im Vergleich zu GeForce Modellen deutlich besser sein.

Im Viewperf 10.0 Test kann sich die FX 3800M deutlich von der alten FX 3700M abheben (wahrscheinlich auch durch die schnelleren Prozessoren in den neuen Notebooks). 

Zur Zeitpunkt der Veröffentlichung ist sie die schnellste professionelle Grafikkarte für Notebooks und eignet sich daher auch für die Bearbeitung von komplexen 3D Modellen.

NVIDIA Quadro FX 2500MNVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
HerstellerNVIDIANVIDIA
Quadro FX Serie
Quadro FX 3800M 128 @ 0.68 GHz256 Bit @ 1000 MHz
Quadro FX 3700M compare 128 @ 0.55 GHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 2800M compare 96 @ 0.6 GHz256 Bit @ 1000 MHz
Quadro FX 3600M compare 96 @ 0.5 GHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 1800M compare 72 @ 0.56 GHz128 Bit @ 1100 MHz
Quadro FX 2700M compare 48 @ 0.53 GHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 880M compare 48 @ 0.55 GHz128 Bit @ 790 MHz
Quadro FX 3500M compare 24/8 cores @ 0.58 GHz256 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro FX 2500M 24/8 cores @ 0.5 GHz256 Bit @ 600 MHz
Quadro FX 1700M compare 32 @ 0.63 GHz128 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 1600M compare 32 @ 0.63 GHz128 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 1500M compare 20/7 cores @ 0.38 GHz256 Bit @ 500 MHz
Quadro FX 770M compare 32 @ 0.5 GHz128 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 570M compare 32 @ 0.48 GHz128 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro FX 380M compare 16 @ 0.63 GHz64 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 370M compare 8 @ 0.58 GHz64 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro FX 360M compare 16 @ 0.4 GHz64 Bit @ 600 MHz
Quadro FX 350M compare 4/3 cores @ 0.45 GHz64 Bit @ 350 MHz
Quadro FX 3800M 128 @ 0.68 GHz256 Bit @ 1000 MHz
Quadro FX 3700M compare 128 @ 0.55 GHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 2800M compare 96 @ 0.6 GHz256 Bit @ 1000 MHz
Quadro FX 3600M compare 96 @ 0.5 GHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 1800M compare 72 @ 0.56 GHz128 Bit @ 1100 MHz
Quadro FX 2700M compare 48 @ 0.53 GHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 880M compare 48 @ 0.55 GHz128 Bit @ 790 MHz
Quadro FX 3500M compare 24/8 cores @ 0.58 GHz256 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro FX 2500M 24/8 cores @ 0.5 GHz256 Bit @ 600 MHz
Quadro FX 1700M compare 32 @ 0.63 GHz128 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 1600M compare 32 @ 0.63 GHz128 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 1500M compare 20/7 cores @ 0.38 GHz256 Bit @ 500 MHz
Quadro FX 770M compare 32 @ 0.5 GHz128 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 570M compare 32 @ 0.48 GHz128 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro FX 380M compare 16 @ 0.63 GHz64 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 370M compare 8 @ 0.58 GHz64 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro FX 360M compare 16 @ 0.4 GHz64 Bit @ 600 MHz
Quadro FX 350M compare 4/3 cores @ 0.45 GHz64 Bit @ 350 MHz
CodenameG71glmN10E-GLM4
ArchitekturG7xG9x
Pipelines24 / 8 Pixel- / Vertexshader128 - unified
Kerntakt500 MHz675 MHz
Speichertakt600 MHz1000 MHz
Speicherbandbreite256 Bit256 Bit
SpeichertypGDDR3GDDR3
Max. Speichergröße512 MB1024 MB
Shared Memoryneinnein
DirectXDirectX 9c, Shader 3.0DirectX 10, Shader 4.0
Transistors278 Million754 Million
Herstellungsprozess90 nm55 nm
Featuresoptimiert für professionelle 3D Anwendungen und CAD ProgrammeOpenGL 2.1, CUDA, PowerMizer 8.0
Notebookgrößegroß (17" z.B.)groß (17" z.B.)
Erscheinungsdatum29.09.2005 20.12.2009
Herstellerseitehttp://www.nvidia.de/page/quadrofx_go.htmlhttp://www.nvidia.com/object/product_qua...
Shadertakt1688 MHz

Benchmarks

3DMark Vantage
3DM Vant. Perf. total + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. total
min: 6584     avg: 6951     median: 6779 (6%)     max: 7491 Points
3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX
min: 5758     avg: 5926     median: 6002 (5%)     max: 6019 Points
3DMark 2001SE - 3DMark 2001 - Standard
27600 Points (29%)
min: 32886     avg: 34790     median: 34790 (36%)     max: 36694 Points
3DMark 03 - 3DMark 03 - Standard
min: 18100     avg: 18342     median: 18341.5 (10%)     max: 18583 Points
min: 33146     avg: 37082     median: 38191 (20%)     max: 39909 Points
3DMark 05 - 3DMark 05 - Standard
min: 8400     avg: 8450     median: 8450 (12%)     max: 8500 Points
min: 16593     avg: 18199     median: 18043 (26%)     max: 19960 Points
3DMark 06 3DMark 06 - Score Unknown Settings + NVIDIA Quadro FX 2500M
3DMark 06
min: 4690     avg: 4695     median: 4695 (8%)     max: 4700 Points
3DMark 06 - Score Unknown Settings + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
13232 Points (22%)
3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
3DMark 06
min: 12050     avg: 12765     median: 12923 (21%)     max: 13323 Points
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - 3dsmax
32.8 Points (68%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - Catia
45.8 Points (96%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - EnSight
min: 47.37     avg: 47.4     median: 47.4 (100%)     max: 47.369998931884766 Points
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - Maya
59.7 Points (32%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - Pro/Engeneer
min: 51.12     avg: 51.1     median: 51.1 (100%)     max: 51.119998931884766 Points
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SolidWorks
59.7 Points (88%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - UGS Teamcenter
38.5 Points (100%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - UGS NX
35.3 Points (72%)
SPECviewperf 11
specvp11 snx-01 + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 snx-01
18.8 fps (13%)
specvp11 tcvis-02 + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 tcvis-02
18.7 fps (31%)
specvp11 sw-02 + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 sw-02
30.6 fps (37%)
specvp11 proe-05 + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 proe-05
6.9 fps (29%)
specvp11 maya-03 + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 maya-03
16.6 fps (13%)
specvp11 lightwave-01 + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 lightwave-01
38.4 fps (41%)
specvp11 ensight-04 + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 ensight-04
16.2 fps (8%)
specvp11 catia-03 + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
SPECviewperf 11 - specvp11 catia-03
23.4 fps (28%)
Windows 7 Experience Index - Win7 Gaming graphics
6.9 Points (87%)
Windows 7 Experience Index - Win7 Graphics
6.9 Points (87%)
Cinebench R10 Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit) + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit)
min: 4429     avg: 4928     median: 4928 (23%)     max: 5427 Points
Cinebench R11.5 Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64 Bit + NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M
Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64 Bit
min: 32.07     avg: 32.7     median: 32.7 (12%)     max: 33.29 fps

Average Benchmarks NVIDIA Quadro FX 2500M → 100% n=4

Average Benchmarks NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800M → 207% n=4

- Bereich der Benchmarkergebnisse für diese Grafikkarte
- Durchschnittliche Benchmarkergebnisse für diese Grafikkarte
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Spiele-Benchmarks

Die folgenden Benchmarks basieren auf unseren Spieletests mit Testnotebooks. Die Performance dieser Grafikkarte bei den gelisteten Spielen ist abhängig von der verwendeten CPU, Speicherausstattung, Treiber und auch Betriebssystem. Dadurch müssen die untenstehenden Werte nicht repräsentativ sein. Detaillierte Informationen über das verwendete System sehen Sie nach einem Klick auf den fps-Wert.

Fifa 11

Fifa 11

2010
med. 1024x768
Quadro FX 3800M:
230.6  fps
high 1360x768
Quadro FX 3800M:
124.2  fps
Risen

Risen

2009
med. 1024x768
Quadro FX 3800M:
64.9  fps
ultra 1920x1080
Quadro FX 3800M:
31.8  fps
Need for Speed Shift

Need for Speed Shift

2009
med. 1024x768
Quadro FX 3800M:
78.5  fps
ultra 1920x1080
Quadro FX 3800M:
40.9  fps
Colin McRae: DIRT 2

Colin McRae: DIRT 2

2009
low 800x600
Quadro FX 3800M:
97  fps
med. 1024x768
Quadro FX 3800M:
82  fps
ultra 1920x1080
Quadro FX 3800M:
29.9  fps
Anno 1404

Anno 1404

2009
low 1024x768
Quadro FX 3800M:
142.8  fps
ultra 1280x1024
Quadro FX 3800M:
61.9  fps

Eine Liste mit weiteren Spielen und allen Grafikkarten finden Sie auf unserer Seite: Welches Spiel ist mit welcher Grafikkarte spielbar?

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2022, 2021
v1.17
log 19. 04:44:22

#0 checking url part for id 5 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 1541 +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Sat, 15 Jan 2022 16:23:34 +0100 +0s ... 0s

#4 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.083s ... 0.084s

#5 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.005s ... 0.089s

#6 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#7 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#8 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#9 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#10 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#11 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#12 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#13 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#14 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#15 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#16 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#17 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#18 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#19 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#20 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#21 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.089s

#22 composed specs +0s ... 0.089s

#23 did output specs +0s ... 0.089s

#24 start showIntegratedCPUs +0s ... 0.089s

#25 getting avg benchmarks for device 5 +0.027s ... 0.116s

#26 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.116s

#27 got single benchmarks 5 +0.005s ... 0.121s

#28 getting avg benchmarks for device 1541 +0s ... 0.122s

#29 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.001s ... 0.122s

#30 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.003s ... 0.126s

#31 got single benchmarks 1541 +0.004s ... 0.13s

#32 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.13s

#33 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.13s

#34 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.13s

#35 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.13s

#36 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.131s

#37 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.131s

#38 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.131s

#39 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.131s

#40 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.131s

#41 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.131s

#42 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.131s

#43 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.131s

#44 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.132s

#45 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.132s

#46 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.132s

#47 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.132s

#48 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.132s

#49 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.132s

#50 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.132s

#51 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.132s

#52 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.132s

#53 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.132s

#54 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.133s

#55 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.133s

#56 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.133s

#57 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.133s

#58 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.133s

#59 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.134s

#60 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.134s

#61 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.134s

#62 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.134s

#63 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.135s

#64 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.135s

#65 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.135s

#66 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.135s

#67 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.136s

#68 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.136s

#69 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.136s

#70 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.136s

#71 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.137s

#72 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.137s

#73 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.137s

#74 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.138s

#75 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.138s

#76 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.138s

#77 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.138s

#78 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.139s

#79 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.139s

#80 min, max, avg, median took s +0s ... 0.139s

#81 before gaming benchmark output +0s ... 0.139s

#82 Got 11 rows for game benchmarks. +0.002s ... 0.141s

#83 composed SQL query for gamebenchmarks +0s ... 0.141s

#84 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.141s

#85 got data and put it in $dataArray +0.001s ... 0.143s

#86 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.001s ... 0.144s

#87 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.144s

#88 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.001s ... 0.145s

#89 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.145s

#90 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.001s ... 0.146s

#91 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.146s

#92 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.001s ... 0.147s

#93 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.147s

#94 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.147s

#95 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.001s ... 0.148s

#96 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.148s

#97 benchmarks composed for output. +0s ... 0.148s

#98 calculated avg scores. +0s ... 0.148s

#99 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.001s ... 0.149s

#100 return log +0.002s ... 0.151s

Teilen Sie diesen Artikel um uns zu unterstützen. Jeder Link hilft!
> Notebook Test, Laptop Test und News > Benchmarks / Technik > Benchmarks / Technik > Grafikkarten Vergleich - Head 2 Head
Autor: Redaktion,  8.09.2017 (Update: 19.05.2020)