FirePro M5950 vs Quadro FX 4800
When comparing FirePro M5950 and Quadro FX 4800, we look primarily at benchmarks and game tests. But it is not only about the numbers. Often you can find third-party models with higher clock speeds, better cooling, or a customizable RGB lighting. Not all of them will have all the features you need. Another thing to consider is the port selection. Most graphics cards have at least one DisplayPort and HDMI interface, but some monitors require DVI. Before you buy, check the TDP of the graphics card - this characteristic will help you estimate the consumption of the graphics card. You may even have to upgrade your PSU to meet its requirements. An important factor when choosing between FirePro M5950 and Quadro FX 4800 is the price. Does the additional cost justify the performance hit? Our comparison should help you make the right decision.
Quadro FX 4800
FirePro M5950 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: FirePro M5950 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 FirePro M5950 here:
Main Specs
| FirePro M5950 | Quadro FX 4800 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 1536 MB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video |
| Check Price |
- Quadro FX 4800 has 328% more power consumption, than FirePro M5950.
- FirePro M5950 is connected by MXM-A (3.0), and Quadro FX 4800 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- Quadro FX 4800 has 1535 GB more memory, than FirePro M5950.
- FirePro M5950 is used in Mobile workstations, and Quadro FX 4800 - in Desktops.
- FirePro M5950 is build with Terascale 2 architecture, and Quadro FX 4800 - with Tesla 2.0.
- Core clock speed of FirePro M5950 is 123 MHz higher, than Quadro FX 4800.
- FirePro M5950 is manufactured by 40 nm process technology, and Quadro FX 4800 - by 55 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Quadro FX 4800 is 700 MHz higher, than FirePro M5950.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 4−5 | 2−3 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
| medium / 1080p | 6−7 | 3−4 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 33% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 9−10 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 20−22 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 9−10 | 5−6 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in Battlefield 5 is 50% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 40−45 | 40−45 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro FX 4800 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 4% more, than FirePro M5950. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 120−130 |
| medium / 768p | 95−100 | 90−95 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 35−40 |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | 21−24 |
| 4K / 2160p | 18−20 | 16−18 |
| high / 768p | 70−75 | 65−70 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 8% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 65−70 | 65−70 |
| ultra / 1080p | 21−24 | 18−20 |
| medium / 1080p | 50−55 | 45−50 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 6% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 75−80 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 45−50 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−33 | 20−22 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in Dota 2 is 10% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 5−6 | 2−3 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 2−3 |
| 4K / 2160p | 2−3 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 10−11 |
| medium / 1080p | 6−7 | 3−4 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in Far Cry 5 is 50% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 5−6 |
| QHD / 1440p | 7−8 | 3−4 |
| low / 720p | 55−60 | 50−55 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 10−11 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in Fortnite is 25% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 9−10 | 5−6 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| 4K / 2160p | 3−4 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 16−18 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−12 | 8−9 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in Forza Horizon 4 is 42% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| medium / 768p | 40−45 | − |
| high / 1080p | 8−9 | 4−5 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 2−3 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | − | 35−40 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in Grand Theft Auto V is 11% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| high / 1080p | 3−4 | 1−2 |
| ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 9−10 | 4−5 |
| medium / 1080p | 5−6 | 3−4 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in Metro Exodus is 100% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 90−95 |
| high / 1080p | − | 80−85 |
| ultra / 1080p | 75−80 | 70−75 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 85−90 |
| FirePro M5950 and Quadro FX 4800 have the same average FPS in Minecraft. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 27−30 |
| medium / 1080p | 16−18 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 11% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 6−7 | − |
| low / 720p | 9−10 | 6−7 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 50% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 20−22 | 9−10 |
| medium / 768p | 12−14 | 8−9 |
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 4−5 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 3−4 |
| 4K / 2160p | 2−3 | 1−2 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 80% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 80−85 | 70−75 |
| medium / 768p | 40−45 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
| high / 768p | 30−35 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M5950 in World of Tanks is 13% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
Full Specs
| FirePro M5950 | Quadro FX 4800 | |
| Architecture | Terascale 2 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | Whistler-XT | GT200B |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 13 April 2011 | 11 November 2008 |
| Pipelines | 480 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 725 MHz | 602 MHz |
| Transistor count | 716 million | 1,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 17.40 | 38.53 |
| Floating-point performance | 696.0 gflops | 462.3 gflops |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 1600 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 57 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | 1.3 | |
| Bus support | n/a | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 67 Mh/s | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Form factor | MXM-A | |
| Check Price |