Quadro FX 3800 vs Radeon Pro 460
Find out if it is worth upgrading your current GPU setup by comparing Quadro FX 3800 and Radeon Pro 460. Here you can take a closer look at graphics cards specs, such as core clock speed, memory type and size, display connectors, etc. The price, overall benchmark and gaming performances are usually defining factors when it comes to choosing between Quadro FX 3800 and Radeon Pro 460. Make sure that the graphics card has compatible dimensions and will properly fit in your new or current computer case. Also these graphics cards may have different system power recommendations, so take that into consideration and upgrade your PSU if necessary.
Quadro FX 3800
Radeon Pro 460 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Radeon Pro 460 is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with Radeon Pro 460 here:
Main Specs
| Quadro FX 3800 | Radeon Pro 460 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 108 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |
| Memory type | GDDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 4 GB |
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| Check Price |
- Quadro FX 3800 has 208% more power consumption, than Radeon Pro 460.
- Quadro FX 3800 is connected by PCIe 2.0 x16, and Radeon Pro 460 uses PCIe 3.0 x8 interface.
- Radeon Pro 460 has 3 GB more memory, than Quadro FX 3800.
- Quadro FX 3800 is used in Desktops, and Radeon Pro 460 - in Mobile workstations.
- Quadro FX 3800 is build with Tesla 2.0 architecture, and Radeon Pro 460 - with Polaris.
- Core clock speed of Radeon Pro 460 is 300 MHz higher, than Quadro FX 3800.
- Quadro FX 3800 is manufactured by 55 nm process technology, and Radeon Pro 460 - by 14 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Radeon Pro 460 is 3400 MHz higher, than Quadro FX 3800.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 10−11 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| low / 720p | 10−11 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 1−2 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 400% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 24−27 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 7−8 |
| 4K / 2160p | − | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 9−10 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 2−3 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in Battlefield 5 is 900% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 4% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| low / 768p | 100−110 | 220−230 |
| medium / 768p | 75−80 | 190−200 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−35 | 100−110 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 65−70 |
| 4K / 2160p | 9−10 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 50−55 | 150−160 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 160% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 25% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| low / 768p | 65−70 | 110−120 |
| medium / 768p | 40−45 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 70−75 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in Dota 2 is 136% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 1−2 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 18−20 |
| QHD / 1440p | − | 18−20 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 6−7 |
| low / 720p | 7−8 | 45−50 |
| medium / 1080p | 2−3 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in Far Cry 5 is 900% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 40−45 | 110−120 |
| medium / 1080p | 4−5 | 60−65 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in Fortnite is 282% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 1−2 | 30−33 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 21−24 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 10−12 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 4−5 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in Forza Horizon 4 is 600% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| low / 768p | 35−40 | 95−100 |
| medium / 768p | − | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | 1−2 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| medium / 720p | 30−35 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in Grand Theft Auto V is 252% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 0−1 | 10−12 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 8−9 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 1−2 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in Metro Exodus is 3600% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 110−120 |
| high / 1080p | 50−55 | − |
| medium / 1080p | − | 110−120 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in Minecraft is 32% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 65−70 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 106% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 9−10 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 2−3 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 1500% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| low / 768p | 4−5 | 60−65 |
| medium / 768p | − | 40−45 |
| high / 1080p | 2−3 | 21−24 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 12−14 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 1300% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
| low / 768p | 65−70 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 30−35 | 60−65 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−12 | 35−40 |
| high / 768p | 27−30 | 55−60 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon Pro 460 in World of Tanks is 82% more, than Quadro FX 3800. | ||
Full Specs
| Quadro FX 3800 | Radeon Pro 460 | |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Polaris |
| Code name | GT200B | Polaris 11 / Baffin XT |
| Type | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 30 March 2009 | 8 August 2016 |
| Pipelines | 192 | 1024 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 907 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 1,400 million | 3,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 14 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 38.40 | 58.05 |
| Floating-point performance | 462.3 gflops | 1,858 gflops |
| Length | 198 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | 5000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 81.28 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | 1.3 | |
| FreeSync | + | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 227 Mh/s | |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Check Price |